December 30, 2016
CapitalPress.com
5
EPA regional head denies knowing details about What’s Upstream
Agency staff
prepared ‘talking
points’ for McLerran
By DON JENKINS
Capital Press
Environmental Protection
Agency Northwest Admin-
istrator Dennis McLerran
has told investigators that he
didn’t know until last spring
about an EPA-funded let-
ter-writing campaign asking
Washington legislators to ban
farming within 100 feet of
waterways, though EPA re-
cords released last week show
his staff prepared a report sev-
eral months earlier intended
to inform him of the letter.
In a signed declaration to
the state Public Disclosure
Commission, McLerran stated
he didn’t learn about a “take
action” link to a letter-writing
campaign on the What’s Up-
stream website until the site
drew complaints from farm
groups in March.
On Dec. 7, however, an
EPA staff member sent back-
ground information for Mc-
Lerran’s use in anticipation
that What’s Upstream would
come up during a multi-agen-
cy meeting on water quality
hosted by the state Depart-
ment of Ecology.
The meeting came one
week after the Swinomish
Indian tribe and several en-
vironmental groups launched
a revised What’s Upstream
website. The launch was
timed, according to the en-
vironmental groups, to influ-
ence the 2016 Legislature.
A bullet point in the brief-
ing prepared for McLerran
noted the “take action” link.
“As anticipated, the web-
site provides a link enabling
readers to send letters to state
legislators generally urging
stronger regulation to protect
water quality from agricultur-
al (pollution),” according to
the EPA document.
It’s
unclear
whether
What’s Upstream was dis-
cussed during the meeting, or
whether McLerran reviewed
the material prepared for him.
No records released by the
EPA so far show McLerran
Don Jenkins/Capital Press
A What’s Upstream billboard shows cows in a stream.
Courtesy of Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency Northwest Administrator Dennis McLerran stands on a beach in
Seattle during a 2015 Earth Day cleanup and holds a sign showing a Twitter hashtag the EPA used
to promote its new Waters of the United States rule. McLerran has declared he didn’t know about the
What’s Upstream letter-writing campaign until spring of 2016.
received the material directly.
McLerran did not respond
to an email asking for clarifi-
cation. EPA spokesmen also
did not provide clarification.
An Ecology spokeswom-
an said the department has no
notes from the Dec. 10, 2015,
meeting.
She described the meeting
as a “very high-level discus-
sion” among top administra-
tors from state and federal
agencies.
The EPA talking points
for that meeting were among
dozens of emails the agency
released Dec. 21 in partial
response to a Freedom of In-
formation Act request by Save
Family Farming.
The group’s complaint ini-
tiated the PDC’s probe into
whether the tribe or the EPA,
or both, violated state disclo-
sure laws by failing to register
What’s Upstream as a lobby-
ing organization.
Save Family Farming di-
rector Gerald Baron said Dec.
22 that the newly released
EPA records appear to conflict
with McLerran’s statement to
the PDC.
The “take action” link is
at the center of allegations
by Save Family Farming
and some federal lawmakers
that EPA funds were used
for grass-roots lobbying. The
tribe has removed the link.
The newly available re-
cords reinforced previous
disclosures that although EPA
staff members questioned the
accuracy of the tribe-directed
campaign, EPA lawyers took
the position that the agency
could not dictate the cam-
paign, even though it was
funded by an EPA grant to the
Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission.
The records also show
that the EPA anticipated the
website would be controver-
sial, and staff members didn’t
want McLerran to be caught
off-guard.
Washington state EPA
Director Lucy Edmondson
asked the agency’s Puget
Sound intergovernmental co-
ordinator, Lisa Chang, to pre-
pare the talking points for the
Dec. 10 meeting, in an email
that referred to the EPA’s en-
vironmental cleanup director,
Dan Opalski.
“Dan O. suggested that
Dennis could use some back-
ground on the Swinomish
Tribe’s ‘What up stream.
com’ campaign/program and
that you could provide some
background/talking points on
that,” Edmondson wrote.
The talking points written
by Chang reviewed the his-
tory and status of the project.
“The final website will likely
be controversial; an earlier
version of the website which
did not even include the letter
to state legislators caused un-
ease in the agricultural com-
munity in the Skagit Basin,”
according to one point.
Another point noted that
the tribe had proposed in late
2013 using EPA funds to run
an initiative to restrict farm-
ing, and that the EPA’s Office
of Regional Counsel found
that EPA funds could be used
that way.
McLerran, in his PDC dec-
laration, stated that he told his
staff to relay to the tribe that
using EPA funds for a ballot
measure was “inappropriate.”
The tribe eventually
dropped the plan, though EPA
records released so far do not
indicate whether McLerran
influenced that decision. The
tribe’s environmental policy
director, Larry Wasserman,
did not respond to a request
for comment.
McLerran’s
declaration
provides his first comments
to be made public on What’s
Upstream since he wrote a
federal lawmaker in May
describing the agency’s role
as focused on “technical
input.”
McLerran also declared
to the PDC that he talked
with Wasserman in July 2015
in hopes that the campaign
would be “toned down.”
McLerran said he had no
more contact with the tribe or
fisheries commission about
What’s Upstream until the
campaign raised its profile by
putting ads on buses and bill-
boards, angering farm groups
and some federal lawmakers.
“I had no personal knowl-
edge of a ‘take action’ button,
billboards or bus ads until
staff informed me of their ex-
istence in spring 2016,” Mc-
Lerran declared to the PDC.
Previously released EPA
records show that other EPA
officials were aware of the
tribe’s plan for a “take action”
link as early as July 2015.
Tribe officials agreed to
take down the billboards,
which promoted the website
and accused farmers of being
unregulated polluters. Mc-
Lerran said the tribe rejected
his request to take down the
website.
Also on Dec. 22, the EPA
sent the PDC a letter arguing
that the state agency has no
jurisdiction over McLerran
acting in his capacity as a
federal official. The argument
echoes the Swinomish tribe’s
position that the PDC has no
authority over how a tribe
spends its money.
PDC Director Evelyn
Fielding Lopez said the agen-
cy normally doesn’t regulate
federal agencies, but add-
ed, “Even a federal agency
doesn’t get to do just what-
ever it wants to because it’s a
federal agency.”
The EPA also argues that
the PDC should dismiss the
complaint against McLerran
because he did not person-
ally provide any funding for
lobbying or direct the spend-
ing. Lopez said that may be
persuasive. “I have questions
whether Mr. McLerran was
involved in any grass-roots
lobbying,” she said.
The PDC has asked Seattle
lobbying firm Strategies 360
to respond to Save Family
Farming’s complaint by Dec.
27. The tribe hired the firm to
create the media campaign.
Lopez said she hopes the
PDC will make a decision on
whether to take enforcement
action by the end of this week.
A separate probe by the
EPA Office of Inspector Gen-
eral into whether What’s Up-
stream was a misuse of federal
funds has yet to be completed.
It remains unclear how
much EPA spent on What’s
Upstream. Previously re-
leased records suggest the
tribe received some $655,000.
The EPA said it has cut off
funding, but has not account-
ed for the money it distribut-
ed.
ROP-51-6-2/#13