Business allowed to do own environmental policing

Friday, Dec. 26, 1997 | 10:16 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- Hundreds of companies, ranging from the "Mom and Pop" gas stations to major power plants, will soon be able to do their own environmental policing.

It will lead to better and faster compliance with Nevada's regulations on air and water pollution and solid waste, supporters say.

And if these businesses don't follow the rules, they will still be faced with fines of up to $25,000 for each violation of the environmental regulations.

"I see this law as being positive ... the companies will be pro-active, says Vern Rosse, deputy administrator in the state Division of Environmental Protection. Inspectors in these firms could find trouble spots that may evade state employees, he says.

Instead of weakening the oversight of industry, it could lead quicker correction of problems in plants, factories and other businesses.

The state Environmental Commission meets Jan. 22 in Las Vegas to adopt the new regulations, based on a 1977 law authored by Assemblyman Brian Sandoval, R-Reno. And the regulations are expected to become effective in March after a legislative review.

"They create an incentive for businesses to clean up their environmental problems," says Sandoval. "People have ignored the problem and it gets worse and worse and generates to other properties.

"This benefits adjacent properties and home owners," he says.

Under the law and regulations, companies subject to state and local inspections can sign an agreement to do their own evaluations. Rosse said the state will list requirements that must be met. It will be up to the companies to follow, rather than having a state inspector pop in from time to time.

If a violation is found, the company will have to make corrections by a deadline. And if it fails, than the environmental protection division steps in and takes "enforcement action" which generally means a fine.

Rosse expects the self-audits to be more thorough. "In no way can we (state inspectors) cover every base in a large facility. We're not that familiar with the process."

It's the larger businesses, Rosse believes that will take advantage of this self-audit. For instance, he said such firms as Timet and Kerr-McGee at the industrial complex in Henderson might decide to do their own evaluations.

But Sandoval says he expects "everyone from big industry to the mom and pop gas stations" to take advantage. "This isn't a big business bill," he said. It's the small business that face a heavier burden on paying the fines.

"It's a lot harder for a small business to absorb these fines," he said.

Small business would probably have to hire a consultant to do the audit. The Small Business Development Center in the University and Community College System of Nevada may play a large role in helping these companies.

Center Director Kevin Dick says it fields 1,000 calls a year from small businesses which want help in identifying their environmental problems and the most economical way of solving them.

Dick said the center employees don't do audits. "We spend a half a day with a business walking through, identifying hazardous waste and emissions and what they have to do to comply."

An audit, he said entails a lot of paper work and the center does not have the funding to do it. But the center stages training sessions for businessmen on environmental regulations and solutions.

The center (1-800 882 3233) provides these services at no cost to the business. And there's no "fear factor" that they will be cited if business call the center for help, Dick said.

His center works with such firms as auto repair shops, dry cleaners, printing operations, metal fabricating, metal and painting business.

Several other states have these self-audit programs. In Texas, Sandoval said 100 properties cleaned up environmental problems, not detected by the state.

He doesn't see this as leading to increased pollution of the air or water. "It's impossible for a person with a bad motive to take advantage of this law."

In some other states businesses have been given full immunity from criminal prosecution and the environmental audits and records are sealed from the public. Sandoval says Nevada law doesn't go that far.

"I got a lot of complaints from business that our law didn't go far enough to provide that protection," referring to open records. He said some suggested nobody will sign up with an full disclosure law.

The legislative bill, Sandoval said gained support from Sierra Pacific Power Co., ARCO and petroleum groups.

Sandoval, a lawyer, said there was one case in California where a broken pipe spilled 50 gallons of effluent. And that cost $250,000 to clean up. "Cleanup is not cheap and the goal here is to get the money towards the cleanup rather than paying penalties."

Rosse said a bill in the 1995 Legislature would have hidden all the audit and enforcement actions from the public. The federal Environmental Protection Agency was concerned about that. "EPA would probably have taken back some of its environmental programs," he said, meaning the federal government, rather than the state would have been policing industry.

The 1997 law, Rosse said doesn't do that. And it will help the public keep an eye on what it's being exposed to. "EPA tried to give us a bad time about this one," referring to the 1997 law.

"We pointed out it will help the environment and be quicker. After it was passed, EPA has not said word one," Rosse said.

If there's a threat to health, the state can still step in and take enforcement actions to protect the public, Rosse said.