House Oks Manure Bill Bill Requires Management Plans For ‘Dairy Nutrients’ By 2002

A proposal for state regulation of “dairy nutrients” - commonly known as manure - won House passage Thursday at the urging of dairy farmers who fear federal intervention.

Facing adjournment next week, both houses stepped up work on a series of proposals to clamp down on drunken driving, although the House rejected a measure to impound drunken drivers’ cars.

The dairy waste measure, SB 6161, was sent back to the Senate for expected concurrence on amendments.

The bill, which passed 97-1, would require every dairy farm in Washington to have an approved “dairy nutrient” management plan in place by the July 1, 2002, and a certified plan a year later. Such plans would include methods to keep manure confined and out of rivers and streams, where it can harm aquatic life.

Most dairy farmers already have a management plan in place, said Rep. Gary Chandler, R-Moses Lake, chairman of the House Agriculture and Ecology Committee.

The state Department of Ecology, which would enforce the law, would have the power to levy fines of up to $5,000 for noncompliance.

Dairy farmers have sought the measure as a way to head off regulation and sanctions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which last year stepped in to regulate dairy wastes in the state.

The measure drew one “no” vote. Rep. Hans Dunshee, D-Snohomish, said he objected on grounds the measure changed the name of “manure” to “nutrient.”

“I’ve had enough of this bull nutrient,” he said to roars of laughter.

In action on drunken driving measures, the House approved and sent back to the Senate for expected approval several amended Senate measures intended to get a grip on drunken driving.

Among them was a bill reducing a motorist’s allowed blood-alcohol level from the current .10 percent to .08 percent. The vote on SB 6257 was 95-2. Congress is moving toward passing a law that denies states some highway funds if they fail to reduce their levels to .08 percent.

The House also passed a bill to automatically suspend for 90 days the driver’s licenses of even first-time offenders. Suspensions would occur upon arrest and before conviction. The bill, SB 6142, passed 67-30.

Also approved and sent back to the Senate for concurrence on amendments was a bill that would require certain drunken drivers to install ignition interlock devices in their cars so their cars won’t start if they have too much alcohol on their breath. The measure, SB 6165, would apply in cases where the accused driver chose a “deferred prosecution,” - that is, alcohol-abuse treatment - instead of fighting the drunken driving charge in court. The bill passed 91-6.

The House rejected a measure allowing police to impound vehicles of drunken drivers even before conviction. SB 6431 specifies that first-offenders’ cars be impounded for up to 30 days, second-offenders for up to 60 days and three-time offenders for up to 90 days. The bill was amended to say that if a person is later acquitted the government must pay the impound fees. But the bill failed, 83-14.

The House also approved SB 6166 and SB 6293, greatly increasing drunken driving penalties. Both passed with nearly unanimous votes.

The Senate, meanwhile, unanimously approved three House anti-drunken driving bills and sent them back to the lower chamber for concurrence on amendments.

They were HB 2885, increasing penalty options for drunken driving, such as electronic home monitoring; HB 3070, doubling to 10 years the amount of time a drunken-driving record stays on the books, known as the “washout” period; and HB 3089, limiting deferred prosecutions to once in a lifetime.

In other action, the House approved a measure giving bosses more protection against defamation suits from employees unhappy at performance evaluations shared with prospective employers.

Current law protects employers from lawsuits unless they have shown reckless disregard for the truth when providing information about former or current employees.

The bill would set a higher standard, forcing workers to prove that employers provided information about them that was knowingly false or deliberately misleading.

The bill, which passed 55-42, was sent back to the Senate for expected agreement on amendments.