Toxics debate reignites.

Byline: Edward Russo The Register-Guard

Three years ago, Gary Paulsen spent nearly $70,000 to make his three Skopil's Cleaners dry cleaning stores in Eugene more environmentally friendly.

Paulsen stopped using a toxic chlorine-based solvent common in the dry cleaning industry - perchloroethylene. He replaced it with a silicone-based solvent that he says makes his business "nontoxic."

Yet Skopil's could be among 170 or so businesses that may be required to participate in Eugene's toxics right-to-know program under an expansion proposed by chemical-reporting advocates.

Paulsen isn't happy about that prospect of having to pay a $360 annual fee. "We're not producing any hazardous waste, and it doesn't seem right that I should have to pay a fee," he said.

Eugene's toxics-right-to-know law established the only city-mandated toxics reporting system in the nation - and it's been a source of contention even before its inception nine years ago.

The controversy will reignite when the proposed expansion is presented for public comment at a City Council hearing Monday.

Advocates say the toxics disclosure rules are valuable and may have prompted some firms to cut chemical use.

But critics say the program exemplifies Eugene's hostility to business and largely duplicates other local, state and federal reporting requirements.

Many business owners dislike paying the fees - and having to pay employees to compile the reports.

The program requires 40 manufacturers to report extensive details of their hazardous chemical use and to pay fees to the city, which catalogs and publishes the data. Another 33 manufacturers don't have to report chemical use, but they must pay fees to help run the program.

The City Council is considering broadening the reporting and fee-paying regulations to include dry cleaners, gas stations, auto body shops and seven other types of nonmanufacturing businesses. Just like Eugene's manufacturers, these businesses would have to report and pay fees if they use more than 2,640 pounds of hazardous chemicals a year. Covered businesses such as Skopil's that use less than that amount would only have to pay annual fees, up to $2,000 per company.

The proposal is an attempt to spread the cost among more businesses in order to reduce the annual fees that the city now charges many of the small manufacturers.

But there doesn't seem to be much public interest - either from citizens or government agencies - in the reams of data the program compiles and publishes.

The city Web site that makes the information available to the public attracts relatively few visitors. And local environmental regulators don't rely on the information, though some use it for comparison purposes.

"One of the key problems we have is assessing public interest and public usefulness of the (toxics) program," said Glen Potter, a fire department employee who oversees the data gathering with the volunteer seven-member Toxics Advisory Board.

The proposed expansion illustrates political rifts. Eugene's new mayor, Kitty Piercy, favors the expansion. The Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce and City Manager Dennis Taylor oppose it.

If approved, the number of affected firms would jump to 240 from 73, city officials estimate.

Expansion advocates say the public would benefit from knowing what types of chemicals are used and emitted by the businesses, including painting and roofing contractors, photo finishing firms and establishments with pools and spas, such as motels, hotels and health clubs.

"Public health officials have very little information about what auto body shops, dry cleaners or other types of businesses may be emitting," said David Monk, former executive director of the Oregon Toxics Alliance and chairman of the city's Toxics Advisory Board.

With more emissions data, officials could better plan neighborhoods so houses are not placed close to businesses that pollute, Monk said. "Having more information would allow multiple government agencies to better monitor the environment," he said.

Lots of reports

Many sizeable companies that use large amounts of hazardous chemicals already must report to a bevy of state, federal and local regulators.

Many of the 40 manufacturing firms covered by the city's toxics program also file similar reports with the state fire marshal, the state Department of Environmental Quality, the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority, and other regulators. Significant emitters of air pollution, for instance, must get permits from and report to LRAPA. Significant dischargers of chemicals to sanitary or storm sewers must routinely file reports with the city and the DEQ. All these reports typically are available if the public asks to see them.

"We have one person whose primary job is to fill out (environmental) reports," said Scott Forrest, president of paint manufacturer Forrest Paint.

Even with the help of a computer program provided by the city, it takes that employee about two months a year to compile the information for Eugene's toxics program, Forrest said.

Dave Doll, a business representative on the city toxics board and environmental compliance officer with manufacturer Newood Display Fixtures, estimates it takes two weeks a year for him to fill out the reports.

"The burden has exceeded what is useful knowledge to the residents of Eugene," he said. "We already track usage for all the materials."

Among local environmental regulators, wastewater technicians use data from the toxics program to double-check chemical discharge reports that they receive from companies, said Niel Laudati, spokesperson for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission, which runs the area's sewage treatment facilities.

Fallout from Hyundai

The database "is useful in identifying potential spills or problems with the Willamette River," Laudati said.

The program originated with concerns over the proposed Hyundai - now Hynix - computer chip factory in west Eugene.

Worried about chemicals at the plant, residents gathered enough signatures to put the proposed charter amendment on the 1996 ballot. It passed by 5,390 votes.

Covered companies must report their use of a range of hazardous substances, including whether the chemicals are altered after being received; are shipped out as product; shipped out as waste; treated on site; or discharged into the air or sewers.

(Guard Publishing Co., the publisher of The Register-Guard, had to file the annual reports until 1999, but then changed its chemical use and no longer has to report. The company does, however, pay an annual $2,000 fee to the program.)

Public interest in the gathered data - either on the Web or in printed reports at the city library - is hard to gauge, said Potter, the city employee who manages the reporting program. However, he said, it does not appear to be great.

For example, a survey of the city Web site's activity shows there were 1,063 individual visitors to the toxics site last month, and 806 individual visitors in January 2003, he said. In March 2004, there were 813 visitors. With the worldwide reach of the Internet, Potter said, such numbers are relatively small.

The Web site has a feature that lets visitors sends e-mails to Potter, but only one person has used that in the past two years, he said.

Connie Bennett, director of library services at the Eugene Public Library, estimates that there have been fewer than 10 requests to look at the printed reports since they were made available in 1999.

Subtle pressure

Right-to-know advocates on the Toxics Advisory Board say the program prods companies to evaluate whether they really need to use hazardous chemicals.

"There is some notion that the light of day has a certain value," said Steve Johnson, a toxics board member, and co-petitioner of the 1996 charter amendment that established the law.

The data show reduced emissions by several manufacturers, including Forrest Paint and King Retail Solutions, a sign maker for the retail industry.

Total toxic chemical emissions for Forrest Paint, for example, dropped from 107,484 pounds in 2000 to 48,756 pounds in 2003. At King Retail Solutions, emissions dropped from 20,706 pounds in 2001 to 13,091 in 2003.

But those businesses aren't about to give Eugene's law much credit.

Scott Forrest said he put an environmentally friendly filter on his factory to reduce unhealthy emissions, mainly because federal regulations required him to do so.

"It has been said elsewhere that our bio-filter was a result of the toxics-right-to-know law," he said. "That was not true. It was a device that helped us comply with the federal Clean Air Act."

Jerry Tippets, general manager of King Retail Solutions, said his firm switched from solvent-based paints to water-based paints a few years ago for much of its sign painting mainly because it was environmentally responsible. "We have the option of choosing processes and materials that use fewer toxic chemicals," he said.

But Potter said reduced chemical use at some firms can be traced to the city-mandated reporting.

"These folks have to report their hazardous chemicals in great detail and make that information public," he said. "This has caused them to take a closer look at their inventories and, in some cases, caused them to ship away hazardous chemicals that they no longer use. In other cases, they have eliminated their use of chemicals. This helps make their reports look better and may help make their operations less hazardous."

The proposed change is aimed at spreading out the nearly $100,000 city cost of running the program among more firms. About a quarter of the money goes to pay Potter, who spends half his time on toxics work. The rest of the money goes to legal fees, other staff support and administrative costs.

Urged by critics of the law, the Legislature in 1999 imposed a $2,000 per-company per-year fee cap, which lowered overall fees for the 11 largest manufacturers.

But that loss of revenue prompted the city to raise the annual fees for the remaining 62 smaller companies. By bringing more companies into the fold, right-to-know advocates argue that the cost to small companies would drop to less onerous levels.

But adding the 170 new companies, many of which would not have to report annual chemical use, would hike the program cost to about $130,000 annually, Potter said.

City Manager Taylor recommends the city keep the program as is. Potter said the city is trying to get the Legislature to repeal or raise the $2,000 cap.

The expansion proposal could create more inequities than it solves, Potter added.

For example, "if an athletic club operates a swimming pool (and uses chlorinating chemicals), must it then declare all ... hazardous substances used in its entire operation?" he asked. "A hospital operating a therapy whirlpool would be another example. Will painting contractors be required to report substances purchased in Eugene, but used outside of Eugene? The list goes on."

Mayor Piercy has said she wants to change Eugene's reputation as unfriendly to business.

"Small businesses are the backbone of our local economy, and we are interested in reducing the current burden caused by the ($2,000) caps," she said.

"I support this expansion of the program because I believe it is in keeping with our city's desire to track the emission (and) use of toxins, so that information can be helpful in keeping our community healthy and safe," Piercy said.

But business owners aren't keen on being dragged into the program.

Jim Dotson, owner of a photo finishing business, figures he would not be required to report hazardous chemical use to the city because his company doesn't use anywhere near 2,640 pounds a year. But he might have to pay about $640 a year to support the program.

"I guess I have some concern about a program that doesn't require me to do any chemical reporting, but still assesses me a fee," said the owner of Dot Dotson's and Gerlach's.

"That doesn't quite compute somehow. What am I paying for?"

TOXICS TIMELINE

1996: Eugene voters approve, by a 55 to 45 percent margin, a city charter amendment establishing a toxics reporting program.

1998: Affected manufacturers begin compiling data on hazardous chemical use. Charter amendment requires program to be self-supporting, so city levies fees on 40 manufacturers. Amount is based on each firm's employee head count, so that larger companies pay higher fees.

1999: In response to a legal challenge filed by affected businesses, city requires an additional 33 manufacturers to pay fees into the program, but they do not have to report hazardous chemical use because they use less than 2,640 pounds of chemicals a year.

2003: A $2,000 per-business cap on fees that was passed four years earlier by the Oregon Legislature at the urging of business groups takes effect. That forces the city to lower the fees it charges the 11 biggest manufacturers, and raise the fees it charges to the 62 smaller companies. For example, Pacific Metal Fabrication, with 64 employees, paid a $821 fee in 2003, but $2,000 in 2004. Hynix, the largest manufacturer, with 1,207 employees in 2003, dropped from $10,732 before the cap to $2,000.

January 2005: Saying it wants to correct unfairness, the Toxics Advisory Board makes two competing recommendations to the council. Right-to-know advocates on the board propose adding businesses to pay fees and report their chemical use, or simply pay fees. The other proposal, from business representatives on the board, would impose a monthly 50-cent surcharge on commercial garbage accounts to supplement the money now raised by fees. The City Council, concerned that the garbage surcharge would represent a tax not based on use, decides it wants to hear the public's views about adding more businesses to the program.

THE TOXICS LAW

What: The nation's only local hazardous chemical reporting program

Covered businesses: Manufacturers with more than 10 employees that use more than 2,640 pounds of hazardous chemicals annually must pay fees and report their chemical use. Manufacturers with more than 10 employees that use less than 2,640 pounds annually do not report chemical use, but pay to support the program.

How the public gets information: Annual reports are available at www.ci.eugene.or.us/toxics, or through printed reports at the public library.

City's annual cost to run program: About $100,000.

What's new: The City Council is considering whether to make the following businesses pay fees into the program, and possibly report their chemical use: gas stations, auto body shops, dry cleaners, roofing contractors, painting contractors, any businesses with a swimming pool or spa, photo developing services (except one-hour services), and crematories. All manufacturers with three or more employees would be added.

What's next: City Council will take public comment at 7:30 p.m. Monday in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 777 Pearl St.

CAPTION(S):

Gary Paulsen, the owner of Skopil's Cleaners, is concerned about a city proposal that could require him to help pay for the city's hazardous waste reporting program. Brian Davies / The Register-Guard Brian Davies / The Register-Guard Andrew Pickering opens a drying oven at King Retail Solutions, a company covered by Eugene's toxics-right-to-know program. "We're not producing any hazardous waste, and it doesn't seem right that I should have to pay a fee." - GARY PAULSEN, OWNER OF SKOPIL'S CLEANERS