We were disappointed by comments made by Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) spokesman Larry Altose in the July 27 article, “Snohomish, environmental group in talks over sewage plant problems” suggesting that enforcement action is not necessary against the city of Snohomish to prevent further violations of their pollution discharge permit.
Five years of toothless censure by the DOE has not stopped the city of Snohomish from repeatedly violating their pollution permit, and there is no indication that the DOE’s current negotiations will yield different results. The DOE’s concurrence with city’s plan to spend $200,000 of taxpayer money on a diffuser that does not actually remove pollutants from the water is not sound and does not protect the long-term health of the Snohomish River.
The DOE has also been conspicuously silent on ammonia, one of the most important pollutants covered by the permit in ensuring fish health. The DOE did not require the city to design a sewer treatment facility capable of treating ammonia when the new plant was built in 1997, nor has it required the city to upgrade its facility now that the city’s permit includes an ammonia discharge limit. Without any incentive to do so the city has not acted, resulting in numerous violations. What improvement does the DOE hope to garner with further delays?
According to the DOE’s own compliance report, 73 percent of Washington’s municipalities were out of compliance with water quality standards in 2000, and 49 percent of those reported five or more violations. Clearly, the DOE’s choice not to take stringent enforcement action does not work. Until the DOE pursues a more fruitful policy, citizen groups like the Puget Soundkeeper Alliance will be forced to step in and pick up the slack in ensuring compliance with water quality standards that protect our river and our way of life.
Puget Soundkeeper
Seattle
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
