Chapter 173-312 WAC and 173-313 WAC
Coordinated Prevention Grants and Local Solid Waste Enforcement Grant Regulation

Overview

Introduction

These rules pertain to the administration of grants programs that by law award funds only to local government agencies. The Coordinated Prevention Grants rule and Local Solid Waste Enforcement Grant Regulation are important tools to assist local governments in the development and implementation of local waste management plans and programs. All rules require updating after a time in order to keep pace with changes in related laws and rules, and to accommodate shifts in the way business is accomplished. The Coordinated Prevention Grants rule was last updated in 2002, and the Local Solid Waste Enforcement Grants Rule has not been updated since 1989. It is less common for a rule to be repealed.

Ecology has been working with an advisory committee comprised of local stakeholders to revise the Coordinated Prevention Grants rule. A draft of proposed changes to the rule was shared with all stakeholders at public meetings in Olympia and Yakima, and by webinar, in March 2017. With this rulemaking we are proposing to repeal the Local Solid Waste Enforcement Grant Regulation, but retain the related grant program. We will eliminate redundant information and fold the essential elements of solid waste enforcement grants into the Coordinated Prevention Grants rule.

A more detailed explanation of why we are doing this rulemaking and what we are trying to accomplish follows. Be sure to view the related pages for the rulemaking timeline, public involvement opportunities, and to view available documents related to this rulemaking.

Why are we doing this rulemaking?

We propose amending Chapter 173-312 WAC for the following reasons:
  • Stakeholders have requested clarification and other modifications including updating the name of the program.
  • We want to improve the focus on funding projects that yield the best return on the investment.
  • We want to improve coordinated planning across local jurisdictions.
  • The grants program has evolved. Criteria and limitations described in the current rule no longer reflect the best approach.
  • We propose repealing Chapter 173-313 WAC because:
  • The two rules draw funds from the same source. Both serve local governments. Much of the language in Chapter 173-313 WAC is reflected in Chapter 173-312 WAC.
  • We can reduce redundancy and increase efficiency by combining the two chapters. We will have one less rule and a consolidated grant program.
What are we trying to accomplish?

Successful adoption of a rule revision for Chapter 173-312 WAC will achieve the following results:
  • Stakeholders will benefit from clarifying the scope and purpose of the program.
  • We will be able to select better projects and manage those projects more efficiently.
  • We will encourage better performance by creating a consequence for non-performance that is notable but not overly punitive.
  • Allocation of funds will improve.
Incorporating the essential elements of Chapter 173-313 WAC in Chapter 173-312 WAC, consolidates two related grant programs, and allows us to eliminate a chapter of the Washington Administrative Code. This practical step results in a more efficient grant program.

Scope of rule development

We are proposing amendments to Chapter 173-312 WAC to:
  • Change the name of the grants program from Coordinated Prevention Grants to Local Solid Waste Financial Assistance, and revise the purpose statement to reflect the essential functions of the grant program.
  • Incorporate the use of funds for purposes of solid waste enforcement, consistent with the repeal of Chapter 173-313.
  • Revise, clarify, and add definitions as necessary to support the revised rule.
  • Simplify and clarify language regarding eligible activities.
  • Clarify the obligation of primary responsible local governments and partnering local governments to coordinate.
  • Organize rule around statutory priorities.
  • Eliminate the ten percent bonus for coordinated applications.
  • Implement a ten percent penalty for recipients who fail to meet performance criteria.
  • Eliminate the concept of a separate offset grant cycle for newly appropriated funds or re-obligated funds, in favor of an emphasis on the soonest possible distribution of available funds.
  • Revise the eighty/twenty percent allocation of funds between planning/implementation funding, and enforcement funding, and establish a minimum allocation for funding enforcement grants.
  • Add a population criteria element to the base level funding for solid waste enforcement grant funding, consistent with the approach for planning and implementation grants.
  • Eliminate the obligation of grant recipients to set aside funding for the next cycle when the full scope of work in the current cycle is not accomplished.
We propose to repeal Chapter 173-313 WAC, but preserve that program by incorporating essential language in revisions to Chapter 173-312 WAC.

Process of development

Ecology will update our web pages to provide information about this rulemaking. We will notify interested parties through the agency email ListServ (WAC Track), through a new Waste 2 Resources Program ListServ, by e-mailing contacts identified in our grants-related database and those identified by grants staff, and we will publish notice in the Washington State Register. We will continue to work with an advisory committee comprised of local stakeholders.

ADDITIONAL RULE INFORMATION

CONTACT

Tami Ramsey
360-407-6612
tami.ramsey@ecy.wa.gov

STAY INFORMED

Subscribe to our email ListServ to receive updates.