Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New By COOKSON BEECHER, The Capital Press ,Staff Writer OLYMPIA, Wash. - State officials will be meeting this week to come up with recommendations about possible changes to Gov. Gary Locke's proposed fertilizer reform bill. Those recommendations, for the most part, will be based on concerns arising over recently released test results that revealed higher-than-expected dioxin levels in some waste-derived fertilizers. "It will be the end of the week before we have a definitive game plan," said Carol Jolly, a top aide to Gov. Gary Locke. "We expect to present our recommendations to the governor early next week." Although the governor's bill calls for adoption of the Canadian standards for waste-derived fertilizers in order to regulate tag-along heavy metals, it doesn't address the issue of dioxins. Health officials are quick to point out that federal research has shown that plants don't take up dioxins. But one dioxin expert said animals can ingest small amounts of dioxin since they often eat some soil as they graze. And Labor & Industry officials point out that the most serious health problem relating to dioxins is associated with breathing them in. Last week, the fertilizer task force - made up of representatives from the ag industry, several state agencies, and the environmental community - wrestled with the challenge of coming up with "dioxin options" that could be presented to the Legislature. But after an entire afternoon devoted to the subject, the group failed to reach consensus. Nevertheless, the questions and issues raised during the meeting, along with the task force members' individual recommendations and testimony from the public, will be presented to Locke for his consideration. But it won't be until the bill is presented to the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee at 8 a.m., Jan. 27, that specific amendments to the fertilizer-reform bill can be proposed. And though the governor can recommend amendments, any amendment included in the bill will need a legislative sponsor. "When it comes to the dioxin issue," said Ecology official Greg Sorlie, "we'll be saying to the legislators, 'Here are some things to consider as amendments.'" Jolly, who also chairs the fertilizer task force, was quick to point out that agriculture's needs and concerns will be considered when making recommendations about modifying the bill. During last week's task force meeting, Chris Chapman, policy adviser with the Ecology, presented a broad range of options pertaining to dioxins that could be considered. Those options range from doing nothing to banning any fertilizer that contains dioxins. Included within that range would be labeling fertilizers found to contain dioxins, establishing permissible levels, and banning fertilizers with certain levels of dioxins. Another option, banning the use of steel flue dust in fertilizers, received a lot of attention during the meeting. Under federal law, an exemption allows this dust to be used in fertilizers, because fertilizers are considered to be beneficial products. Some members of the group called for the state to close that loophole. Although the lack of standards pertaining to dioxin levels was considered by some members of the group to be barrier in coming up with recommendations, several people testifying at the meeting during the public comment period scoffed at that, saying there are mountains of science available about cancer risks associated with dioxins. "The legislation would be side-stepping some serious public health issues," said Bruce Jennings of the Toxics Coalition, pointing out that the issue of dioxins needs to be addressed, especially in light of the recent test results. But task force member Craig Smith, Northwest Food Processors Association, pointed out in a letter to the group that none of the group's members are qualified to make a determination on how to set a standard for dioxins in waste-derived fertilizers. "Consequently, I would recommend caution when deciding whether to include dioxins in the current bill," he said. Expressing concern that the controversy surrounding this issue could stall the current legislation, he recommended that dioxins be addressed in a separate bill so that the current bill could go forward. But task force member Patricia Martin, representing the United Farmworkers, pointed out that the meeting had been called because significant levels of dioxins had been found in some fertilizers and that state agencies are concerned about the possible health impacts of this on farmworkers, employees in fertilizer manufacturing plants, and members of agricultural communities. "I have a vested interest in four children who reside in a community surrounded by farmland," she said. With a clear call to citizen participation, Jolly urged all of those concerned about this issue to make sure they get on the mailing list for the legislative meeting schedules and to get a contact in Olympia who can keep them informed and up to date. Information about receiving the legislative meeting schedules can be obtained by calling Senate Word Processing, 360-786-7344. "You have to take this responsibility on yourself," she told them. Meanwhile, the governor's proposed bill has found sponsors in both houses. Rep. Gary Chandler, R-Moses Lake, is the prime sponsor of HB 2618, and Sen. Ken Jacobsen, D-Seattle, is the prime sponsor of SB 6474. Information about these bills and their progress through the Legislature can be obtained by calling the Legislative Hotline, 800-562-6000. Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New By COOKSON BEECHER, The Capital Press ,Staff Writer OLYMPIA, Wash. - Washington farmers who rely on zinc fertilizers to grow their crops will be paying close attention to Gov. Gary Locke's proposed fertilizer-reform bill now that the possibility of including a ban on the use of a waste-byproduct containing zinc in the legislation is being considered by state officials. Richard Camp Jr., president of Bay Zinc Corporation, estimates that about one-half of the zinc fertilizer products sold in this state contain steel mill flue dust (K016), which is currently exempt from federal hazardous waste laws when used in a beneficial product such as fertilizer. This exemption is receiving a great deal of scrutiny now that state scientists have discovered higher than expected levels of dioxin in several waste-derived fertilizers manufactured in this state. The tests revealed that a granular zinc fertilizer product containing steel flue dust, when applied to farmland at recommended maximum annual rates, resulted in an increase of .004 parts per trillion over the Environmental Protection Agency's estimated average background soil concentration level for North America, which is 8 parts per trillion. In those same tests, the liquid zinc foliar fertilizer and the zinc fertilizer product made with tire ash, when applied at recommended maximum annual rates, did not result in farmland levels exceeding EPA's estimated average background soil concentration level for North America. Camp said that virtually all the zinc fertilizers in America are made from waste byproducts. In Eastern Washington especially, zinc is an essential micronutrient used for growing such crops as corn, hops, edible beans, apples, potatoes and onions. When asked if other zinc fertilizers would become more expensive if those containing steel mill flue dust were to be banned in this state, Camp could only refer to the tried-and-true laws of supply and demand. "In a free market, it's pretty simple to figure out that if supply goes down the price goes up," he said. But he also pointed out that it's hard to say just what would happen, considering how competitive the marketplace is. "There are a lot of products out there," he said. When talking about proposals to ban fertilizer products containing steel mill flue dust, Camp said he can only hope state officials look at science and not be ruled by public perception. "If it's hazardous, let's not do it," he said. "But we've got a lot of money invested in science. We ought to let science do the talking." Department of Ecology official Greg Sorlie said his department will be considering several different approaches that could be taken on this issue. Among those options, Ecology could adopt a rule amending its dangerous waste regulations in a way that would ban the use of the dust in fertilizers registered in Washington, a course of action that would take about 1 1/2 years. Or, Ecology could adopt an emergency rule doing the same thing, which would take only six months. But Sorlie pointed out the department uses emergency rulings very sparingly because it cuts out a lot of public review. Or, the proposed fertilizer reform bill could be amended to include that ban. "In terms of timing, it would be preferable to include it in the bill," he said, pointing out that if the bill passes, then the ban would go into effect in July. During last week's fertilizer task force meeting, Sorlie said Ecology has never liked the federal exemption for steel flue dust in fertilizers. "We'd like to see a level playing field where everyone has to meet state standards," he said. During the same meeting, several members of the task force and several people testifying during the public-comment period called for a ban on fertilizers containing the dust. Nevertheless, Sorlie pointed out that caution is in order here since zinc fertilizers made with other waste byproducts such as brass foundry shavings have not yet been tested for dioxin levels. "Some may be as high or higher in dioxin levels than steel flue dust," he said. "If that proves to be the case, then we haven't done any good." Carol Jolly, a top aide to Gov. Gary Locke and chair of the fertilizer task force, said state officials will take a good look at how a ban on fertilizer products containing steel mill flue dust would affect the state's farmers and will also explore what other zinc fertilizers would be available to them. If the ban were to be included in the proposed bill, and if the bill passes through the Legislature, farmers would probably still be able to buy the fertilizer this year, she said, because fertilizers must be registered by the end of June, and the legislation wouldn't go into effect until July. More information about the progress of fertilizer reform - Senate Bill 6474 and House Bill 2618, can be obtained by calling the Legislative Hotline, 800-562-6000. Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New By COOKSON BEECHER, The Capital Press ,Staff Writer OLYMPIA - Clean water as soon as possible - no ifs, buts or ors about it. That's the message coming in loud and clear now that a judicial agreement - the first of its kind in the nation - has been hammered out directing the state to restore the health of nearly 700 water segments, salt and freshwater alike, within the next 15 years. For farmers and timber owners, the recent agreement, reached just last week, will inject more immediacy into the challenge of tackling water-quality issues. Buffers, fencing to keep livestock from waterways, shade requirements, levels of dissolved oxygen, water temperature, manure-management practices, water quantity, and in some cases, the use of fertilizers and pesticides - all of these will be part of the formula to improve water quality. Ecology officials are quick to point out that had this agreement not been reached, the courts would have ordered EPA to step in, thus opening up the state to increased federal control. In addition, the timeline for compliance probably would have been much shorter. In Idaho and Georgia, for example, the courts have imposed time lines of five to seven years. Thanks to this agreement, Washington has 15 years to get its waterways back into healthy shape. "Landowners such as farmers and timber growers are much better off than if the courts had rendered a decision," said Ecology official Steve Saunders. "Without the agreement, EPA would have taken a much broader swipe. We wanted to keep more state control and therefore more local control in coming up with watershed-based plans." The recent agreement is the result of a lawsuit launched in 1991 by the Northwest Environmental Advocates and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center against the state's Ecology Department and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nationally, there are about 30 states with similar lawsuits pending. In filing the suit, the plaintiffs said the environmental agencies had an inadequate program to assess the condition of its water bodies and to develop the required Total Maximum Daily Loads, referred to as TMDLs. TMDLs are a measurable way to identify sources of pollution in waters that don't meet water-quality standards and to determine how much the waters can receive and still remain healthy. These standards are designed to make sure water can support such uses as swimming, fishing, drinking, habitat, and agricultural and industrial supply. Nina Bell, executive director of Northwest Environmental Advocates, said the agreement shows that the state recognizes how important clean water is to its residents. "In making these changes," she said, "Ecology has the support of the public who wanted the Clean Water Act in 1972 and, over 25 years later, still want to meet its goals of water clean enough for fish, wildlife and people." According to Ecology, the leading pollution problems in this state come from nonpoint sources - or the cumulative effects of many diffuse activities. Fecal coliform bacteria from failing septic systems and poor agricultural practices have been identified as two of the leading pollution problems in Washington's waters. "The TMDLs will be used to clean up all the sources of water pollution, not just those that come out of an industrial outfall or sewage treatment plant," said Chuck Clarke, EPA's Northwest Regional administrator. He pointed out these standards will be developed through the EPA-Ecology agreement. Last week's agreement is a historical one in that it makes Washington state the only state in the nation to embark on developing both TMDLs and an implementation plan. "Usually states try to weasel out of implementing a plan," said Ecology official Dave Peeler, one of the chief negotiators of the agreement. "But we felt it didn't make sense to do the studies and make estimates about allocations and then not follow through. That would have been a lot of work for nothing." In the past six years, Ecology has produced approximately 200 TMDLs. Under this agreement, potentially 1,700 TMDLs will need to be completed. That figure is based on the 666 water segments that do not meet water quality standards multiplied by the types of pollution problems in the waters. In talking specifically about agriculture, Peeler was quick to recognize the value of the voluntary Best Management Practices that many farmers already have in place. "We want to build on those," he said, pointing out that farmers will now have to go a step further and begin meeting the standards of the Clean Water Act. And he was emphatic about the need for all landowners, farmers included, to take the state's commitment to cleaning up its waterways seriously. "They need to make their plans with this in mind," he said. "This issue is not going to go away." Jim Jesernig, director of the state's Agriculture Department, called the agreement an important step in improving the state's water quality. But he pointed out that state and federal agencies need to be working "on the same page" when developing watershed plans so that those plans will meet the requirements of both the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. "It's important that we don't go off on one tangent or the other and end up with a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing," he said. And he warns that citizens need to be actively involved in these watershed plans if they don't want to see federal agencies and the courts stepping in and calling all of the shots. Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New By COOKSON BEECHER, The Capital Press ,Staff Writer OLYMPIA, Wash. - Holding up a photograph of his three young children, Eastern Washington dairyman Steve DeRuyter pitched a heartfelt plea for a proactive waste-management program during his turn last week testifying before the Senate Agriculture & Environment Committee meeting "I try not to get my kids involved," he said, referring to a citizens' lawsuit recently filed against him for allegedly violating parts of the Clean Water Act. "But my daughter comes home from school all of the time asking, 'Daddy, will we have anything left when the suit is done with?'" He told the legislators how she tries to cheer him up. "'Smile, Daddy," she says, 'we'll have something left. Don't worry about it.'" With emotion still evident in his voice, he told the legislators: I'd just like to use that to stress the importance of having a good bill to protect other people so they don't have to go through this." DeRuyter was one of the dairy operators who traveled to Olympia to testify in favor of the proposed dairy-nutrient management bill, SB 6161, which calls for regular inspections of all dairies. And though the farmers conceded the blanket inspection requirement is not an easy pill to swallow, they agreed it is critically important to get legislation into place that ensures that all dairy operators are complying with the Clean Water Act. Under the state's current complaint-driven dairy-waste management program, Ecology has proven to be so ineffective an enforcer that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has stepped in with a program of unannounced inspections and stiff fines. The proposed legislation calls for each dairy to be inspected at least every 24 months. Based on a priority system, those farms in strict compliance with the Clean Water Act would not be inspected as often as those that appear to be at risk for causing pollution. No fees would be charged. "I am in favor of this bill," dairy farmer Ladon Linde from Outlook, Wash., told the legislators. "Although it will be more demanding on the industry, I think we need that for the industry's reputation as a whole. Pollution hurts all of us . . . and it gives polluters an economic advantage." Dairy farmers weren't the only ones lending their support to the proposed bill. A long parade of industry representatives, environmentalists, agency officials - even a representative of the commerical fishing industry - also gave it a thumbs up, although most offered suggestions on how it could be improved. The bill's supporters were glad to hear Dick Wallace of Ecology say the department agrees with the intent of the bill and believes it provides the key elements to creating the conditions that will lead to overall industry compliance. But he noted that the bill needs some sort of certification that the farm plans dairy operators will be using are actually being carried out. Debbie Becker, executive director of the Washington State Dairy Federation, agreed with him on that point. "Certification of actual implementation is important. We concur on that," she told the legislators. The need for funding for additional inspectors to ensure the new program will be effective was a key point for environmentalists representing People for Puget Sound, the Sierra Club and the Washington Environmental Council. Pointing out that currently there are only two full-time Ecology inspectors to cover the state, both Sen. Dan Swecker, R-Rochester, prime sponsor of the bill, and Becker of the Dairy Federation agreed on the need for additional inspectors, with Swecker calling for at at least five more. The issue of the proposed bill's range of options that dairy farmers can choose for coming into compliance with the Clean Water Act was also a source of concern for some of those testifying. But Becker explained that the options were drafted with the goal of developing a program that reflects the intricacies that exist within the industry. "We didn't want to differentiate between East and West, big and small, and older versus younger facilities" she said. "We feel that it's very, very important that we have a bill that can take into consideration the differences in the industry." And she emphasized that time is of the utmost importance. "We need to get a program up and running very quickly," she said. "This industry is in desperate need of having a credible program we can get on the ground and start to show improvement." With a full range of interests showing support of the proposed bill during the public hearing, Sen. Swecker was happy to say he believes it meets the two-fold goal of bringing the industry into compliance, while at the same time providing a safe harbor for those in compliance. "I believe this is more than a first step," he said. "I believe it's pretty close to the bull's eye." More information about this proposed bill, SB 6161, and its progress can be obtained by calling the Dairy Federation, 360-412-0875, or the Legislative Hotline, 800-562-6000.
Fetilizers, Zinc Ban, Water Priority and Dairy Waste
Fertilizer reform bill prompts concerns over dioxins
Wash. leaders consider ban on waste by-products with zinc
Landmark deal makes water top priority
Farmers, officials testify on dairy waste program