10 years ago 1997

The city of Arlington and Waste Action Project recently settled a lawsuit filed by WAP for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act, reports Arlingtons attorney Steve Peiffle. The lawsuit, filed in January 1996, alleged violations of the CWA by Arlington in the operation of its waste water treatment plant on the Stillaguamish River. Discharge to the river is regulated by the Washington State Department of Ecology through the provisions of a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. The complaint requested relief that included a declaratory judgment that the city violated the CWA, an injunction preventing operation in violation of the CWA and NPDES permit, recovery of attorneys fees, and civil penalties of $25,000 for each of nearly 100 alleged violations. The settlement agreement, according to Peiffle, is in the form of a consent decree, which has been lodged with the federal court for review and comment before becoming official. The decree acknowledges that all the violations were disputed by Arlington, which had a new treatment facility under design before the lawsuit was filed. Under the terms of the consent decree. Arlington agrees o be in compliance with the provisions of NPDES permit no later then October 1997 and has agreed to pay civil penalties of $1,000 to the U.S. treasury, and WAPs attorney fees up to $10,000. In addition, Arlington has agreed to a supplemental environmental project consisting of routine inspections of commercial and industrial sites at the Arlington Municipal Airport, a water conservation program, and designation of an employee to act as a pretreatment officer. Arlington officials are pleased with the settlement. We believe this is a good outcome for thee citizens of Arlington. We have agreed to build our new treatment plant, which we were already in the process of doing, but on a stricter time frame then previously planned. We have agreed to projects which are good for the environment and our own utility systems. And the settlement results in very little out-of-pocket cost for the citizens, said City Public Works Director Ed McMillan. Lawsuits under the CWA are becoming more common, says Peiffle. Under the act, any violation, no matter how small, subjects an NPDES permit holder to penalties of up to $25,000 per violation per day, plus liability for attorneys fees. As the act is implemented by the Department of Ecology, terms of NPDES perms are stricter, meaning cities have much less margin for error and much more exposure to lawsuits filed by citizens groups under the act.

25 years ago 1982

The Arlington and Darrington school districts seek voter approval of special school levies during the Feb. 2 general election. Arlington School District residents will be asked to approve a two-year special levy for collection in 1983-84. Voter approval Feb. 2 will allow the school district to collect $554,200 in 1983 and $570,500 in 1984 at a cost of about $1.63 per $1,000 of assessed property each year. Darrington School District presents a one-year levy of $129,000, $20,000 above the $109,000 levy approved by voters in 1981. While the levy amount has increased, the cost per $1,000 of assessed property remains the same at $1.72. Lakewood School District has no levy on the ballot because of the approval of a two-year levy last winter. The Arlington School District needs the funds in 1983 to cover a projected $550,000 of expenditures not covered by the state. If the levy fails the school district would be forced to cut its teaching staff to cover the expenditures, said Richard Post, district superintendent, before the school board determined the levy amount Dec. 14. The levy wont fund new or additional programs. The school district must cut spending even if the levy is approved to balance the budget. Program changes may occur as priorities change, but increased program levels is impossible, according to the school district. The levy will support the portions of the local operating budget not funded by the sate. For the 1981-1982, the amount is $548,267. The levy will fund six areas: 30.1 percent for school transportation; 20.5 percent for special needs programs (handicapped and gifted); 1.3 percent for field trips; 17.6 percent for extra curricular program (including transportation); 21.8 percent for employee related cost (leaves and substitutes mandated but not funded); and 8.7 percent for non-employee related costs (utilities, insurance, and supplies). The Darrington school district levy of $129,000 is for general maintenance and operations. The funds are needed in addition to state funds. The school district needs the levy to supply an estimated $45,000 for transportation, $15,000 for community center rent, $34,500 for building operations and repairs, and $34,500 for books and consumable classroom supplies. The levy is needed just to continue the present program, according to the school district. The recent special session of the legislature and a decline in enrollment have cut Darringtons anticipated state funds by 4.1 percent or about $48,704. Last year, 1980-81, the bus transportation costs were $113,599. The district received $59,964 in state reimbursements, or only 52.8 percent and this year the school district expects an even smaller reimbursement. The balance comes from the special levy. The Special Education Program, managed by state and federal laws, cost the district $60,622 and were reimbursed only $51,705 or 85.3 percent. The districts utility costs have increased to $40, 741 and insurance is up to $23,892. Keeping the buildings open, clean and maintained cost $66,075 last year and book prices have jumped from $3 or $4 to $10 or $12 and the list of increases goes on, according to the district. Since 2,620 votes were cast in the 1981 general election last November, 1,048 (40 percent) votes will be needed to validate the Arlington levy election. Sixty percent of the votes must be affirmative to approve the measure. Another school district with a two-year levy is Granite Falls. The school district is asking residents to approve $144,750 levy for 1983 at a $1 per $1,000 assessed valuation and a $144,750 levy for 1984 at a 95 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation.

50 years ago 1957

President Charles S. Jones of the Richfield Oil Corporation announced Monday that the Richfield company has purchased a total of 1,000 acres of land on the Puget Sound, for a Northwest refinery site. The area is just north of and bordering the Tulalip Indian reservation and includes Kayak Point. The site is accessible from two improved roads and fronts on water of sufficient depth to accommodate tank ships of any size. Crude oil will be received by tank ship or by pipeline connection with the Trans-Mountain Canadian pipe line which now extends to within 25 miles of the new refinery site. In making the announcement Monday Mr. Jones said Our increased volume of sales of petroleum products with the continued rapid growth of population and industry in the Pacific Northwest requires that we build a refinery in the area. At a gathering in Everett at the Yacht Club on Monday night, officials of the Richfield company met with representative business men and officials of the area, discussing the plans for the project, which, it is understood, will require considerable preliminary work and planning before actual construction can get underway. It is understood it will be about three years before the plant is completed, about 1,500 being employed during the height of the construction period. When completed, between 300 and 500 will be regularly employed. Drilling to test the bottom of the bay is now under way, and according to preliminary reports, the results are proving satisfactory. A large dock will be erected, and as there is deep water just offshore, the dock will parallel the shoreline, and water depth will accommodate the largest tankers. Other buildings would include administration, warehouse and maintenance, processing units, storage tanks, etc. Officers of the company attending the meeting were: L. F. Strader, assistant to vice president of manufacturing; David E. Day, vice president, in charge of manufacturing; W. G. King, vice president, market division; all of Los Angeles, and H. B. Douglas, manager, market division, Seattle area. Officers of the Trans-Mountain Oil Pipeline Co., from Vancouver, B.C., were also present. They were: D. M. Morrison, president; E. C. Hurd, Adm. Mgr.; C. D. Bailey, Chief Eng.; E.S. Davis, Opr. Mgr.; T. A. Haslett, Opr. Eng.; J. H. McQuarrie, Corp. Sect. From the Arlington office of the Trans-Mountain Oil Pipelinne Co. were J. M. Jones, H. H. Ladd, C. R. Macauley. Everett Winkes of Arlington, a member of the Snohomish County Industrial Bureau, and J. C. Carpenter also attended. It is estimated the project will entail an investment of between $35,000,000 ad $50,000,000. The area is apparently within the Twin City school district.