California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting

Minutes: Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting - June 19, 2003

I. Introductions

Members present: See attached participant roster.

II. Agenda review

No changes.

III. Approval of January 30, 2003 Minutes

One typographical error changed.  Rachel Morton to post approved minutes on CIWMB website.

IV. EAC Resolutions - Status & Updates

  • 2002-02 - Burn Dump Advisory Workgroup. Ongoing.
  • 2002-05 - Enforcement Program Plan (EPP) Toolbox. Ongoing. Patti Henshaw is working on templates and approved procedures.
  • 2003-01 - EAC Policy and Procedures. Completed. Greg to forward jurisdictional map to Rachel Morton.
  • 2003-02 - LEA Survey Partnership Issues. Ongoing.  EAC forwarded two letters to CIWMB Board Members. Need official feedback from Sharon Anderson regarding CIWMB issues, which may include enforcement issues.

V. EAC Issues for Discussion

  1. Permits for Permitting and Enforcement (P&E) - Concurrence vs. Administrative Concurrence: EAC Resolution 2003-04Patti Henshaw requests a formal procedure regarding 5-year permit review changes and what constitutes a full revision. Suggests a task group be formed to look at the 5-year review process to determine how a change can be made without requiring a full permit revision. Orange County to be on the task force. Patti will write up the resolution.
  2. Burn Dump Protocol - Advisory Workgroup: Stuart Black, Karen Trgovcich with DTSC and Wes Mindermann with CIWMB gave an update on the status of the Draft Protocol for Burn Dump Site Investigation and Characterization report, dated April 2003. Stuart indicated that the working group is addressing overlap issues and intend to clarify the document. There are four key topics that they are currently addressing:
    1. The disconnect between what is meant by no further action vs. no further characterization. The group will reword the document to clarify that no further characterization would be needed if the site had continued inspections as outlined in a SIP. This could change if an identified problem occurs later on.
    2. Overlap of analytical methods. The group is working in-house to pare down analytical method to reduce redundancy.
    3. LEAs have involvement in the site investigation process (SIP), although the certified unified program agents (CUPA) and local planning do not. Locals need to be involved. Who is the lead agency at the beginning of the process? The Department of Toxic Substances Control's (DTSC) intention is to get involved only if it is a sensitive-use issue. DTSC will be more of an oversight agency.
    4. This is a screening level investigative process. The intent is to avoid overlap. The statutory deadline for this completed report is June 30, 2003.

    Karen Trgovich indicated that the CIWMB will remain the lead for LEAs. CIWMB staff will identify the process and advise DTSC. Stuart B. indicated that there is language built into the document for the ability to revise after one year of implementation. This report will be put on their website.

    Additional discussion surrounding how the workgroup was formed; What constitutes a 'site'? DTSC defines it "as the area of contamination". The CIWMB has a different definition.

    Bill Prinz asked what happens if the LEA is not the lead but responsible for inspections. Karen Trgovich replied that if waste is left in place, the property will be deed restricted. Whether or not the LEA will continue with their inspection frequencies will need to be discussed with CIWMB staff. Scott Walker added that there is a potential for archiving if another agency is lead.

  3. Compostable Materials - Associated Health Affects (odor, bioaerosols): Proposed Advisory. Ongoing issue with developments, etc. With more and more composting comes more and more complaints. Odors may be a nuisance, a quality of life issue but do not have adverse health issues. Discussion included: Air Districts possible involvement and/or oversight; possible funding for a study; sensitive receptors; when do emissions become odors; when would an LEA site a nuisance violation for odor? When does an odor from a composting facility equal a health concern requiring more aggressive enforcement?  Patti Henshaw suggests an LEA Advisory that looks at the health effects from composting facilities to assist with public education and enforcement. CIWMB is considering this request.

    Approval of EAC Resolution 2003-05 to address this issue.

  4. May 8 Permit Workshop Update: Leonard Grossberg gave the update. More communication is needed from Board staff when there is a conflict and/or different treatment of LEAs. There is the issue of "appeal of violations" on inspection reports (Waste Management Inc. contracts, industry barriers). Board staff and LEAs are in agreement that inspection reports should not be appealable. Although, some Board members would like to restructure this process as well. Mark DeBie stated that relative to this May 8th Workshop, Howard Levenson has a comprehensive plan of Board concerns and issues - LEAs will be involved in the process.
  5. LEA Survey/Issue Statements/Conflict Resolution, Follow-Up: On-going. Sharon Anderson needed to discuss current issues with Howard Levenson. Dan Avera and Howard will need to set priorities for the next California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health (CCDEH) meeting. Sharon will set up a meeting with Greg Pirie, Howard Levenson and Dan Avera.
  6. Construction and Demolition (C&D) Phases 1 & 2 - new requirements in Phase 1 Effecting Phase 2: During the final 15-day comment period, many significant changes were made to the Phase I regulations. The EAC will evaluate those Phase I changes that carried over to the Phase II regulations still in the approval process.  Ernie Genter will write a letter for the EAC stating its concerns with these changes. The letter will also address EAC concerns regarding procedure and the short comment period to evaluate these last-minute significant changes. The letter will reference the partnership resolution, which raises concerns with regulatory package concerns in a letter previously sent to the Deputy Director and to CCDEH.
  7. Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Regulations: One workshop was already conducted in San Jose. A second will be held June 30, 2003 at the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) meeting in Diamond Bar. The 60-day comment period expired June 17, 2003; 23 comments were received, 6 from LEAs. Most LEA comments centered on the "diversion cops" issue. Some LEAs have requested to review the studies used to underpin the current performance standards (e.g. particle sizes, etc.). Also, a new "Pozishell" product is being used at some landfills. The CIWMB is contemplating whether to add it to the list of approved ADC. On July 7, 2003, the CIWMB will hold a hearing and accept public testimony. In August 2003, a 15-day comment period will commence. Mark DeBie stated that LEAs would be responsible to verify that operators are keeping ADC records during inspections, whereas ADC compliance will be left to the CIWMB to enforce.
  8. Implementation of a Protocol for Organic Regulations - Q&A's: The idea is for the CIWMB to collect questions about the organic regulations, then disseminate the answers to all interested parties to ensure consistent interpretation and implementation. Mark DeBie stated that CIWMB management would review questions posed to the Permitting and Inspection (P&I) section. The answers will then be disseminated to the LEAs. He also stated that Sharon Anderson would be working to develop a Q&A website. LEAs should cc their round table chairperson with their question to the P&I staff. Greg Pirie stated that the routing method is less important than the consistency of the answers by the P& I staff.

VI: CIWMB Topics, Updates and Discussion.

  1. EAC Mediation: In previous EAC meetings, an idea that the EAC act as an ombudsperson between LEAs and the CIWMB or other agencies to settle regulatory disputes was discussed. Patti Henshaw posed the idea of regional mediation, whereby the EAC members within a particular region of the State would hear disputes. This would bypass travel constraints posed by the current budgetPatti will e-mail all EAC members on this idea of regional mediation and for the EAC members to discuss this at their Roundtables.
  2. Pending Legislation: None discussed.
  3. Training: No new news on the LEA Conference and training has been suspended until the State budget is passed.
  4. Other Updates: Permits for P&E versus Administrative Concurrence - Mark DeBie and Howard Levenson are open to the idea of bringing more permits through the administrative concurrence process since travel to the Board meetings is increasingly difficult for LEAs.

VII. Public Comment Period - No comments

VII. Next EAC meeting scheduled for August 20.

EAC Archive

Please note: Past meeting agendas and notes are retained for historical purposes. Over time, some information and links on these pages may become dated and/or inaccurate.

Last updated: February 09, 2005
Enforcement Advisory Council (EAC) http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LEA/EACouncil/
Leta Forland: Leta.Forland@calrecycle.ca.gov (916) 341-6395