Illegal dumping of lead/arsenic into waterways by SeaSoft

[Bruce Justinen]

For all of you who claim you have the FACTS. You too, may have your day in court also. I have been so slandered and vilified by so many who seem to know everything and seem to have it all figured out. So here are a few of the facts. This is not a defense because I do not owe any of you a defense. I have run SEASOFT SCUBA ethically and have always tried to do the right thing for 36 years.

We have not been found guilty of anything by the Department of Ecology, there will be a trial next June, 2021. There will also be a second trial, we have filed suit against the WA State Department of Ecology for willful slander and libel and are asking for $20,000,000 in real and punitive damages. I will not discuss any details about this case though I long too.

I was also accused of entering an ex-employee's home last January. I had another employee with me and we had gone to see if she was home. This employee had known her for 10 years, they had both done drugs together. With me sitting in the car, he knocked on the door and when she did not answer, he suddenly ran around the back of the house. I WAS NOT AWARE THAT HE WAS GOING TO DO THIS. Less than a MINUTE later he walked out the front door, got into the car and said to me, "I've known her for years, she never locks her door, so I jumped in the open bathroom window to see if she was OK." Nothing was taken, even the ex-employee said that.

I NEVER even got out of the car! Yet, despite this, the ex-employee has had us charged and because of the COVID 19 we are stuck in a legal no man's land. Before this incident, I had never even had handcuffs on in my entire life. It was so embarrassing and shaming just like all of these posts are. I have always tried to be honest and truthful and to treat people right. Oh, I've made plenty of mistakes but even with those, I have tried to make them right.

WA Labor and Industries has made SEASOFT a better company.

When this thing started in 2018 we had our air tested on the person who was filling our lead products and the results were 26.2 ug/cu. ft., the PEL (permissible exposure limit) for lead in the air is 50. This last March in our most recent air sampling, our lead filling machine operator's air measured .03 ug/cu. M. PEL 50. Yes, .03 ug/cu M.

We test our employees that work with lead every year with a BLOOD SERUM LEAD DRAW to measure the amount of lead in their bloodstream. In July, 2018 our lead filler had a lead blood level of 24 and the PEL is 50. The latest test in April was a 14 with the PEL being 50. Our head sewer: July, 2018 - 5, April, 2020 - 1, with a PEL of 50.

Don't always believe what you read.

This is the last thing I will write about this. For years I have tried to help people. I have hired multiple people who were on work release from jail. People who were trying to start life over. People who were homeless and just needed a break. People that had a learning disability or slight mental illness. I hate to put this down because it brands people because some of the above have gone on to be very successful. Some are now homeowners, have great jobs, even a couple who met here have been together for years now - happily!

But there were many failures as well, I still couldn't make the choices for them, I couldn't get up for them, I couldn't respect boundaries for them, I couldn't come to work for them, the list goes on. And, of course, some of them, I had to let go, even if it hurt to do so.

But I gave them a shot and no one else did, I'm OK with that even if I have had to pay dearly for it. At first, it was hard to sleep at night. But sleep has come easier because I know that I did the best I could and I never did anything to hurt anybody or the earth and waters that I love intentionally.

 

[wnissen]

Wow.

 

[Bruce Justinen]

I know it is almost 4 years later but I am just getting caught up with life. The Washington State Department of Ecology's PRESS RELEASE of Dec. 11, 2018 was devastating for our business and for me. It took over a year to determine what took place and who was responsible for it.

The visit by Labor & Industry and Ecology took place over the last week of June and the 5th of July, 2018. My wife Noreen and I had left for our annual sales road trip approximately June 19 or 20th, 2018.

I KNOW LEAD, I have handled millions of lbs. of lead in the last 35 years. I know the correct way to handle lead. We have a whole set of protocols and best practices in place to make sure that what happened while I was gone doesn't happen. But I cannot control people's choices when I am not there and the breakdown in the management that was replacing me failed to intercede when the protocols were being breeched.

Again, though, I am still responsible and we should have been fined. We just should NOT have been fined $197,000 as a first time offender. Secondly, we did not deserve to be libeled with lies and untruths that destroyed our business as the Washington State Department of Ecology doled out its vigilante justice without regard to due process or the rule of law. There were no checks and balances, ECOLOGY has no need for a court or a judge. It just takes that Press Release and throws it over a big branch, puts it around your neck and then kicks your horse. No one or at least, very few are going to listen to you.

The Washington State Department of Ecology has destroyed countless businesses, relationships, marriages, and even your health, your self esteem, your financial health and that have done all of this while making unproven, unsubstantiated statements of fact about you.

So it should go without saying that we are suing them for actual and punitive damages.

Thanks for listening. I'll keep you all updated.

Bruce

 

[broncobowsher]

Wish you the best with that. This has really been drawn out. Hope you win. Not that government is bad, but when it gets out of hand it can really get out of hand. If what you say is true (I've heard your side, there are 2 sides) there are some people who are out of touch and shouldn't be allowed in this line of work anywhere near this stuff.

 

[rjack321]

I know it is almost 4 years later but I am just getting caught up with life. The Washington State Department of Ecology's PRESS RELEASE of Dec. 11, 2018 was devastating for our business and for me. It took over a year to determine what took place and who was responsible for it.

The visit by Labor & Industry and Ecology took place over the last week of June and the 5th of July, 2018. My wife Noreen and I had left for our annual sales road trip approximately June 19 or 20th, 2018.

I KNOW LEAD, I have handled millions of lbs. of lead in the last 35 years. I know the correct way to handle lead. We have a whole set of protocols and best practices in place to make sure that what happened while I was gone doesn't happen. But I cannot control people's choices when I am not there and the breakdown in the management that was replacing me failed to intercede when the protocols were being breeched.

Again, though, I am still responsible and we should have been fined. We just should NOT have been fined $197,000 as a first time offender. Secondly, we did not deserve to be libeled with lies and untruths that destroyed our business as the Washington State Department of Ecology doled out its vigilante justice without regard to due process or the rule of law. There were no checks and balances, ECOLOGY has no need for a court or a judge. It just takes that Press Release and throws it over a big branch, puts it around your neck and then kicks your horse. No one or at least, very few are going to listen to you.

The Washington State Department of Ecology has destroyed countless businesses, relationships, marriages, and even your health, your self esteem, your financial health and that have done all of this while making unproven, unsubstantiated statements of fact about you.

So it should go without saying that we are suing them for actual and punitive damages.

Thanks for listening. I'll keep you all updated.

Bruce

As far as I can tell, you never even appealed this notice of violation to the Pollution Control Hearings Board. (PCHB for out of state folks that's a group of three administrative law judges who decide cases like this outside of superior court as a first stop. If you lose before the PCHB you're entitled to appeal before Thurston County Superior Court which is the next relevant legal stop, then appeals court and finally state supreme court)

If you did, I'd love to see their opinion. Many of your violations seem to have been enhanced by your statements to the inspectors about your "routine disposal practices" at the time.

At one point you were "appealing to the US Supreme Court"... apparently that didn't work out either. So I am eager to see your next lawsuit filing against Ecology for damages.

 

[Zef]

The seems to be inconsistencies between the report posted above and the statements that Bruce has posted on ScubaBoard regarding the nature of the violations.

@Bruce Justinen , can you please explain the delta between your statements on the board and the report from Ecology?

-Z

 

[Fishdip]

"""""Do I see a garden hose slowly siphoning off mostly clear water or do I see wheelbarrows, buckets and barrels of lead and wastes being discarded in the dark?"""" You said it was clean water and then in a nother update stated mostly clean?

 

[Bruce Justinen]

This email might answer most questions you all have but I want to say categorically, "the WA State Department of Ecology has lied repeatedly and because they are considered the "good guys", they have been given the benefit of the doubt in most cases. The people that know me have almost entirely supported SEASOFT."

Here is the truth, after 7 years.

SEASOFT SCUBA VS. WA St. Depart. of ECOLOGY
​

It has taken 7 exhaustive years and 3 losing court cases. All of this has taken a toll personally and on SEASOFT.

I have been advised to ignore my promise to come back to SCUBABOARD and “tell all”.

No good can come from what I am about to write as I see it. There will be many skeptics and cynics who will decide that they know more, I must be lying, why this or why that, and I cannot win any of those disputes, or very few.

However, I promised to give the diving public some conclusion to "SEASOFT's ILLEGALLY DUMPING LEAD and ARSENIC" saga. I intend to fulfill this obligation despite the response we might receive.

The 1st thing I want to respond to is the accusation that I had broken into a residential home. If it wasn't for COVID, this bogus charge would have been dropped immediately, and you would have never heard of it. This charge was instigated by a disgruntled employee who wanted (and ended up being granted) unemployment benefits despite the fact that he quit voluntarily.

NO TRIALS took place for more than a year and a half; so, my case drifted along for more than 2. I had to live with the stigma attached to being accused of a felony, knowing I had done nothing wrong.

When it was finally scheduled for trial, the prosecutor immediately dropped it for lack of any evidence. No evidence?...Why?...Because it didn't happen. I never set foot in anyone's home illegally nor would I. I wrote about what really happened elsewhere in this thread.

2. What happened at the very beginning? SEASOFT did not initially file an appeal with the POLLUTIONS CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD?

From SCUBABOARD SUPPORTER RJack321 "As far as I can tell, you never even appealed this notice of violation to the Pollution Control Hearings Board. (PCHB for out of state folks that's a group of three administrative law judges who decide cases like this outside of superior court as a first stop. If you lose before the PCHB you're entitled to appeal before Thurston County Superior Court which is the next relevant legal stop, then appeals court and finally state supreme court). If you did, I'd love to see their opinion."

A very valid observation and as it turned out that SEASOFT’s entire case in 4 different courts centered on this question.

SEASOFT was served with the original citation on Dec. 11, 2018 and was given 30 days to appeal the citation. Over 9 days I wrote a 40-page appeal rebuffing most of the conclusions that the WA State Department of Ecology had arrived at. I hired a law firm and met with my attorney on December 21st or 22nd.

I gave them a copy of the CITATION APPEAL I had just finished writing. The law firm was supposed to send it in to the PCHB's address within the 30 days’ time period. They failed to do this.

My attorney neglected to send it in before he went on Christmas vacation and forgot to have his paralegal send it in. He later stated that he thought I was going to send a copy in. (What attorney would ever delegate to the client something that is so crucial to the success of the case?). The repercussions of that decision were a fatal wound on everything we tried to do in court thereafter.

The attorney left for an offshore vacation and by the time he returned and realized what had happened the 30 days had expired. He wrote a letter to ECOLOGY asking them to allow our appeal to be accepted (they are the only ones who can accept an appeal of that type, not the PCHB.). They declined and here is the first issue I have with the state.

Instead of being able to appeal the “timeliness” issue with the Pollution Control Hearings Board, which represents the judicial side of these proceedings, we were forced by state law to appeal to our “prosecutor”, Ecology for relief from the timeliness judgement

A letter came back several days later from ECOLGY denying our appeal of the “timeliness” of our original appeal.

In the meantime, the law firm had accepted my case based on the TORT LAW claim against ECOLOGY, which they felt was very strong. They were willing to accept up to 40% of the Tort Claim and had a pile of papers for me to sign. One of the documents I signed was a RELEASE from the law firm. In that written release, I release them from ANY damages claimed by me against them even if their actions were negligent. I signed it not understanding the full implications of what my signature meant.

We then went to court to first overturn ECOLOGY's denial of our initial appeal because of timeliness. Our argument was that in virtually any legal matter the defendant is entitled to his day in court and that the defendant must be given another "kick at the can" or the option of some other action. We argued that that there must be a protocol in order to achieve that end. ECOLOGY argued that state law does not require them to grant us a reprieve from the “timeliness” judgement.

Their argument is that 30 business days, as allowed by WA St. law is enough time for a cited company to respond to the Citation and if we fail to do so, we waive all of our rights and more importantly, ALL OF THEIR ARGUMENTS NOW BECAME FACTS AND ARE NO LONGER ALLEGATIONS.

Defendants are given 30 business days to return their appeal to the PCHB, and it is their responsibility to do so. There is no other remedy!

Since as RJack 321 rightly stated, "If you lose before the PCHB then you can appeal before the Thurston County Superior Court which is the next legal stop, then appeals court and finally the State Supreme Court."

Here is what we found over 5 years of being in court and no matter how strong our arguments were, no matter our claim against the 8th Amendment, no matter how unfair their actions were to us, no matter how much we were libeled, no matter how much ECOLOGY lied, we were destined to lose.

I didn’t realize that the WA St. Dept. of Ecology had already won way back in June of 2019. From their COMPLAINT TO RECOVER UNPAID PENALTY, a document filed with the State of Washington Thurston County Superior Court on June 27th, 2019, as follows. (see the highlighted section:

8. …A recipient of a penalty may appeal the penalty to the POLLUTION CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD (PCHB) but must do so within thirty (30) days of receipt of the penalty. Instead of immediately filing an appeal with the PCHB, the recipient may choose to file an application for relief with ECOLOGY within thirty (30) days receipt of the penalty. If an application for relief is filed and denied, the recipient must appeal the denial to the PCHB within thirty (30) days of receipt.

9. Defendant did not submit an application for relief to ECOLOGY, and did not file an appeal with the PCHB. The Penalty is not subject to any further administrative or judicial review. (BOLD mine). Thus, the Penalty issued on December 10, 2018, became due and payable after thirty (30) days from the date that Defendants received the Penalty, which was January 18, 2019. RCW 43.21B.300(3)(a)…

Now I want to address the actual harm done by our “environmental crime”, as it was embellished and exaggerated by the WA State Department of Ecology. In their arrival at the penalty of $197,000, Ecology was dishonest and illogical in their description of what SEASOFT was guilty of and they were unethical at how they arrived at that the penalty amount.

• What actually happened. I left for my summer road trip to Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Nevada, Idaho and back home. It was supposed to be a five-week road trip.
• Two weeks into the road trip I was called back to Washington because the WA State Dept. of ECOLOGY and the WA State LABOR & INDUSTRIES (LNI) had inspected the inside and outside of our factory. They have very little experience with lead other than the old Tacoma smelter.
• LNI was concerned about the factory workers exposure to lead. I immediately left Albuquerque, New Mexico the same hour they called and headed home. I got home on Friday, July 6th, 2018. I had all of SEASOFT’s employees meet me at a medical lab on Monday morning, July 9th, 2018 and I paid for every employee to have their blood drawn to check for lead levels in their bodies. We received the results on Thursday, July 12, 2018. The PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for blood in the body is 50 parts per billion. All of SEASOFT’s employees had 5 parts per billion or less except for one, he had 24 parts per billion. LNI cleared us and allowed everyone to go back to work.
• ECOLOGY was mainly concerned about a “lead spill” on the side of our building. We were cited for this and charged $197,000. However, in configuring our fine, ECOLOGY made multiple assumptions or “guesses”.

 

[Bruce Justinen]

PART TWO

a. SEASOFT for dumping lead every day since we moved to our new factory, this allowed them to multiply our fine for 12 months x 3 years so that it ballooned the citation amount.

b. That we were making a profit from dumping. This allowed the penalty to be doubled per day x 36 months.

c. SEASOFT with polluting the outside area with MEK, toluene and mineral spirits. They were so incompetent that they were confused by what we did where. SEASOFT uses MEK on the drysuit zipper edges before we glue them into a drysuit.

Toluene is a solvent that is in our drysuit and wetsuit glues and we carefully use it for cleaning up glue after we use it. Mineral spirits is a mild solvent, and we use it to clean up tabletops, tools etc. from glue use. We do NOT and NEVER have used it for cleaning lead. Their claim was pure incompetence on the part of ECOLOGY.

Yet here is what ECOLOGY ascertained on July 8th, 2019, long after the spill had been cleaned, to the contractor who cleaned up the spill. The contractor is trying to close the site as having been cleaned. Here is what ECOLOGY wrote to them:

“It was noted by Ecology’s initial Site investigators that a mixture of MEK, toluene, and mineral spirits was used to clean the dirty lead shot, and that a mixture of oil and graphite was used in the processing of the lead shot. Ecology believes it more likely than not that these substances were also discharged into the environment along with the lead shot and lead dust. MEK, toluene, mineral spirits (by analytical method NWTPH-Gx), and oil (by analytical method NWTPH-Dx), should also be included in any future sampling for the Site.
d. One of the blatant unethical things that ECOLOGY did was call me and tell me that because of the spill we now had to register with the EPA as a “Large Quantity Generator” (LQG) of toxic wastes. I unquestionably filled in the papers because I felt so devastated that my employees had been dumping lead contaminated water over a small area of gravel next to our factory.

One of the three accusations that ECOLOGY listed for our citation of December 10, 2018 was that we transported toxic materials illegally.

Turns out that while I was away that one of the two guys who leaked the contaminated water took our container full of lead sludge and emptied it into three 5-gallon buckets with sealed lids and took it the less than ½ mile to our local HAZO-HOUSE where small businesses and homeowners like us can take their toxic waste and dispose of it safely.

BUT NOW that ECOLOGY had SEASOFT sign as a Large Quantity Generator of hazardous wastes. “Large Quantity Generator” (LQG) SEASOFT was unilaterally charged with taking this
lead to HAZO-HOUSE because a LQG is NOT eligible to use HAZO-HOUSE. This after the fact, unethical citation was of course, like all SEASOFT’s charges, found to be true because SEASOFT had no way of appealing this once our attorney failed to send in the original appeal.


However, there is still a burden of proof. In ECOLOGY’s original Response to this transportation, ECOLOGY states, “improper transportation of their own waste creates significant risk of spills and improper disposal of hazardous wastes.”

Here was SEASOFT’s response from an Affidavit entitled: AFFIDAVIT of BRUCE JUSTINEN to the WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT of ECOLOGY’S RESPONSE BRIEF:
#5. The State has the burden of proof to prove that the taking of 3 – five-gallon sealed buckets with dirty lead shot, less than half a mile to the HAZO HOUSE that was just down the road…created a significant risk or the prospect of a spill.”

However, none of SEASOFT’s arguments or defenses were EVER CONSIDERED. Once we missed the appeal deadline in January of 2019, ALL of ECOLOGY’s accusations became, again, legally – the truth.

e. Again, ECOLOGY accused us of purposely spilling lead for all 36 months we were located at this location in Lacey, WA and the fine was multiplied by these months. Even though the objective evidence of the spill supports SEASOFT’s testimony that the spill occurred over a two-week timeline versus 3 years.

In a typical ECOLOGY Citation action, ECOLOGY cites, charges, insinuates, embellishes, and accuses the other party with a substantial amount of unsubstantiated charges against the cited party. ECOLOGY does this because they KNOW that the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) will typically toss out some, if not a substantial number of the accusations, citations and embellishments.

Ecology had no proof of the 36-month accusation against SEASOFT; when the final analysis was done by an outside contractor hired by the actual landowner it was determined that the spill area covered two small oblong shapes that measured a total of 187.5 sq. ft. For perspective the average size of a master bedroom in a 2,400 sq. ft. house is 271 sq. ft. (Source – National Association of Home Builders).

Not exactly what you would expect to find if SEASOFT was dumping contaminated lead water every day for 36 months.

Or is it more likely that two rogue employees, wanting to finish cleaning 421 lbs. of old weight belts as soon as possible, ignored SEASOFT’s safety protocols while the boss is away? They thought they would not be caught, so they poured the contaminated lead water
into the gravel on the side of SEASOFT’s building. SEASOFT is guilty of this action, it has to be held accountable for its employees actions.

HOWEVER, the evidence needs to support the accusation. If SEASOFT had had the opportunity to argue just this one, single point, our fine would have been reduced to 1 month x citation amount versus 36 months x citation amount. There are multipliers for so many months so the 1 x month citation
would not have even been 1/36 of the fine amount but much LESS. However, for the sake of this illustration, imagine if the original fine of $197,000 had been divided by 36.

It would have been $5,472.22, hardly worth ECOLOGY’s while.
YOU DECIDE
For the sake of contrast, find your way to: Environmental penalties for fourth quarter 2018

You will find a Citation given to the UW research vessel RACHEL CARSON, for spilling 558 gallons of diesel fuel into Portage Bay, a busy part of Lake Union in Seattle, WA.

The question to be asked is this: Did SEASOFT’s spill, which according to one of the contractors geologist amounted to 4 or 5 shotgun shells worth of lead equate to the RACHEL CARSON’s 558 gallons of diesel fuel into Lake Union?

Remember this, when the investigation was finally over, ECOLOGY found, much to their chagrin, that SEASOFT’s spill never entered the water system, the sewer system, nor did it harm any animal or person AND was cleaned up in 3 days.

The fine levied on October 25, 2018, only 46 days before SEASOFT’s $197,000, on the RACHEL CARSON in ECOLOGY’s citation was $4,000. Please explain how justice is fair?

THE SPILL

 

[BRT]

PART TWO

a. SEASOFT for dumping lead every day since we moved to our new factory, this allowed them to multiply our fine for 12 months x 3 years so that it ballooned the citation amount.

b. That we were making a profit from dumping. This allowed the penalty to be doubled per day x 36 months.

c. SEASOFT with polluting the outside area with MEK, toluene and mineral spirits. They were so incompetent that they were confused by what we did where. SEASOFT uses MEK on the drysuit zipper edges before we glue them into a drysuit.

Toluene is a solvent that is in our drysuit and wetsuit glues and we carefully use it for cleaning up glue after we use it. Mineral spirits is a mild solvent, and we use it to clean up tabletops, tools etc. from glue use. We do NOT and NEVER have used it for cleaning lead. Their claim was pure incompetence on the part of ECOLOGY.

Yet here is what ECOLOGY ascertained on July 8th, 2019, long after the spill had been cleaned, to the contractor who cleaned up the spill. The contractor is trying to close the site as having been cleaned. Here is what ECOLOGY wrote to them:

“It was noted by Ecology’s initial Site investigators that a mixture of MEK, toluene, and mineral spirits was used to clean the dirty lead shot, and that a mixture of oil and graphite was used in the processing of the lead shot. Ecology believes it more likely than not that these substances were also discharged into the environment along with the lead shot and lead dust. MEK, toluene, mineral spirits (by analytical method NWTPH-Gx), and oil (by analytical method NWTPH-Dx), should also be included in any future sampling for the Site.
d. One of the blatant unethical things that ECOLOGY did was call me and tell me that because of the spill we now had to register with the EPA as a “Large Quantity Generator” (LQG) of toxic wastes. I unquestionably filled in the papers because I felt so devastated that my employees had been dumping lead contaminated water over a small area of gravel next to our factory.

One of the three accusations that ECOLOGY listed for our citation of December 10, 2018 was that we transported toxic materials illegally.

Turns out that while I was away that one of the two guys who leaked the contaminated water took our container full of lead sludge and emptied it into three 5-gallon buckets with sealed lids and took it the less than ½ mile to our local HAZO-HOUSE where small businesses and homeowners like us can take their toxic waste and dispose of it safely.

BUT NOW that ECOLOGY had SEASOFT sign as a Large Quantity Generator of hazardous wastes. “Large Quantity Generator” (LQG) SEASOFT was unilaterally charged with taking this
lead to HAZO-HOUSE because a LQG is NOT eligible to use HAZO-HOUSE. This after the fact, unethical citation was of course, like all SEASOFT’s charges, found to be true because SEASOFT had no way of appealing this once our attorney failed to send in the original appeal.


However, there is still a burden of proof. In ECOLOGY’s original Response to this transportation, ECOLOGY states, “improper transportation of their own waste creates significant risk of spills and improper disposal of hazardous wastes.”

Here was SEASOFT’s response from an Affidavit entitled: AFFIDAVIT of BRUCE JUSTINEN to the WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT of ECOLOGY’S RESPONSE BRIEF:
#5. The State has the burden of proof to prove that the taking of 3 – five-gallon sealed buckets with dirty lead shot, less than half a mile to the HAZO HOUSE that was just down the road…created a significant risk or the prospect of a spill.”

However, none of SEASOFT’s arguments or defenses were EVER CONSIDERED. Once we missed the appeal deadline in January of 2019, ALL of ECOLOGY’s accusations became, again, legally – the truth.

e. Again, ECOLOGY accused us of purposely spilling lead for all 36 months we were located at this location in Lacey, WA and the fine was multiplied by these months. Even though the objective evidence of the spill supports SEASOFT’s testimony that the spill occurred over a two-week timeline versus 3 years.

In a typical ECOLOGY Citation action, ECOLOGY cites, charges, insinuates, embellishes, and accuses the other party with a substantial amount of unsubstantiated charges against the cited party. ECOLOGY does this because they KNOW that the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) will typically toss out some, if not a substantial number of the accusations, citations and embellishments.

Ecology had no proof of the 36-month accusation against SEASOFT; when the final analysis was done by an outside contractor hired by the actual landowner it was determined that the spill area covered two small oblong shapes that measured a total of 187.5 sq. ft. For perspective the average size of a master bedroom in a 2,400 sq. ft. house is 271 sq. ft. (Source – National Association of Home Builders).

Not exactly what you would expect to find if SEASOFT was dumping contaminated lead water every day for 36 months.

Or is it more likely that two rogue employees, wanting to finish cleaning 421 lbs. of old weight belts as soon as possible, ignored SEASOFT’s safety protocols while the boss is away? They thought they would not be caught, so they poured the contaminated lead water
into the gravel on the side of SEASOFT’s building. SEASOFT is guilty of this action, it has to be held accountable for its employees actions.

HOWEVER, the evidence needs to support the accusation. If SEASOFT had had the opportunity to argue just this one, single point, our fine would have been reduced to 1 month x citation amount versus 36 months x citation amount. There are multipliers for so many months so the 1 x month citation
would not have even been 1/36 of the fine amount but much LESS. However, for the sake of this illustration, imagine if the original fine of $197,000 had been divided by 36.

It would have been $5,472.22, hardly worth ECOLOGY’s while.
YOU DECIDE
For the sake of contrast, find your way to: Environmental penalties for fourth quarter 2018

You will find a Citation given to the UW research vessel RACHEL CARSON, for spilling 558 gallons of diesel fuel into Portage Bay, a busy part of Lake Union in Seattle, WA.

The question to be asked is this: Did SEASOFT’s spill, which according to one of the contractors geologist amounted to 4 or 5 shotgun shells worth of lead equate to the RACHEL CARSON’s 558 gallons of diesel fuel into Lake Union?

Remember this, when the investigation was finally over, ECOLOGY found, much to their chagrin, that SEASOFT’s spill never entered the water system, the sewer system, nor did it harm any animal or person AND was cleaned up in 3 days.

The fine levied on October 25, 2018, only 46 days before SEASOFT’s $197,000, on the RACHEL CARSON in ECOLOGY’s citation was $4,000. Please explain how justice is fair?

THE SPILL

View attachment 915470

I have been through this type of thing with the state of Washington. Not for pollution, but for paperwork violations. We paid, not because we were wrong but because the cost of defending ourselves was more than the state was fining us. They hit the jackpot with you when your attorney missed the deadline. I have lived in this state for my entire life. If I had it to do over again I would have left at 21.