Street roots., March 11, 2016, Page 5, Image 5

News
Street Roots • March 11 -17, 2016
POLLUTION, from page 4
What businesses had to do was pay a fee based on
their pollution volume and file a detailed inventory
report that shows how they are using all the.
reportable hazardous substances that come through
their doors, Eppli said. Noncompliance fines were
capped at $25,000 per day. Fees for participating in
the mandatory program ranged from a few hundred
dollars per year to more than $7,000.
When the lawsuit landed in the Oregon Court of
Appeals in 1999, a judge changed the fee structure,
making the fee amount based on the number of full-
time employees rather than pollution.
The judge also exempted pesticides. That same
year, then-Gov. John Kitzhaber signed a bill into law
that made it challenging for any other local
government to institute a similar program. It also
placed limitations on the Eugene program and capped
the non-compliance fine at $1,000 per day.
Associated Oregon Industries pushed the bill,
which environmental groups believed was aimed at
crippling the program. Originally Kitzhaber pledged
to veto it, but he changed his mind after several
amendments were made.
Before Portland could implement its own right-to-
know program, this legislation would need to be
repealed, said Zach Klonoski, Portland Mayor Charlie
Hales’ policy adviser.
“The state has made it very difficult for
communities to pass community right-to-know
ordinances,” he said.
Limitations put in place by the 1999 bill include a
cap on the business fee at $2,000, with no adjustment
for inflation. This forces smaller businesses to
compensate for the decrease in fees on large
businesses, because by law, the program must be self-
sustaining. The’bill also added requirements for
multiple open-comment periods from the public and
other agencies that would draw out and complicate
the implementation process.
Arkin said that while removing the limit ations ■
would make it easier, to start a righwoknow program
in Portland, it wouldn’t be impossible if they remai^
• EppB said some of these limitations would help a I
local government avoid the push back experienced in
Eugene by malting the process transparent to affected
businesses and other agencies on the front end.
However, if a polluting facility is
legal and permitted, Peveto said, “it
really doesn’t matter what you know
. \\ XX*««
about its emissions if the agency
(DEQ) isn’t going to shift the
regulatory framework to regulate
and protect public health with their^
permitting process.”
. She said she agrees people have the right to know
if they are being exposed to toxicants. “The question . j
is, does that specific law help?” she said.
“I would assume that even supporters would
acknowledge that a program that started 30 years ago
might need to be reconstructed,” she said. “Clearly,
Eugene still has significant industrial, and other, air
pollution problems.”
But the knowledge a right-to-know program such as
Eugene’s would provide could catalyze community
grass-roots efforts, said Colin Price at Oregon
Environmental Council.
Permit program
Page 5
During an environmental forum last week.
Portland’s top three mayoral candidates showed y
support for this declaration by calling for a new office
to regulate air pollution locally.
Hales’ adviser, Klonoski, said air quality reform
needs to start at the state level, but the city is
exploring the possibility of working with other local
governments to estabfish a regional air authority if
DEQ fails to take steps to reduce pollution.
“We are prepared to take action,” he said.
If local governments establish a regional air quality
authority, collaboration among agencies is crucial,
Price said.
“I think that there is still the opportunity for local
jurisdictions to partner with DEQ and with the state
to move forward on this, and that may be the most
effective near-term strategy,” he said.
The Oregon Environmental Council is promoting a
change in the fundamental way DEQ conducts its air
quality permitting.
What about my neighborhood?
Under its current system, Price said, the levels of
In
Portland,
the most detailed source of
pollution that are allowed can lead to elevated risk for
information about point-source air pollution is a
cancer, aggravated asthma and impacts on children,
facility’s air quality permit, issued by DEQ. But DEQ
such as brain development, as well as other health
doesn’t post permits online (Lane county’s regional
risks.
air authority does), and even if it did, the permits
This is because DEQ’s air quality permitting
program is based on the pollution control technology
would show only the maximum pollution allowances,
that’s available to a particular industry, not the human not the amount of pollution that is actually emitted.
If Portland residents want to see the permit of, say,
health impact of the pollution emitted. This means
the manufacturing plant down the street from their
that if the technology to effectively limit the pollution
home, they must go through a lengthy public-records
doesn’t exist, the permit allows for the pollution to
request process.
continue without it, regardless of health impacts.
That’s exactly what Seth Wbolley and Greg Bourget
Price said putting human health first would be a
of Portland Clean Air did. In. January, they posted the
more proactive approach.
data they’d collected from air quality permits issued
“They have the authority to change the
requirements in their permitting process without new across Portland on their website, portlanddeanair.org.
Woolley said it took them a year to get all the records
authority,” he said, “Which is why it seems like a
■ from DEQ.
logical target for action moving forward.”
Portlanders really have no way of knowing about
He said DEQ should also focug on rebuilding trust,
pollution in their area uniess they smell it or see Jt*.
and that it should try to do so by identifying other
he said, “but mostly you don’t see it because of the
facilities that could fie posing a. threat to vulnerable
opacity rules.”
communities within their vicinities. He recommends
Woolley and Bourget decided to inform the public 1
DEQ increase awareness in the community about air
about Portland’s air pollution problem through a*
pollution problems and then look for near-term
website and by going door to door, telling people
solutions like good-neighbor agreements that
about nearby pollution and encouraging them to get
encourage facilities to voluntarily cut down on
involved.
pollution.
•
' z
,
'■
“Air pollution tends to be the moM impactful in the
On Feb. 18, Portland’s mayor and Multnomah
first couple miles around the location,* he said,
County’s chair signed off on a letter to the governor
making 1he facilityneighbors’ testimony most
stating they would be willing to explore establishing a
compelling should they testify before government
; regional air pollution authority, effectively
taking over the responsibility of
But soon after they posted their data online, The
monitoring Port1and-arca air polluters.
POLLUTION, page 1
ill