California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting

Minutes: March 8, 2005

Meeting called to order 9:38 AM

I. Introductions

Bill Prinz, Southern Cities Round Table
Leonard Grossberg, Southwestern Round Table
David Altman, North Central Round Table
Donna Heran, CCDEH
Matt Fore, South Central Round Table
Patti Henshaw, Southern Round Table
Dennis Ferrier, Northern Cities Round Table
Trey Strickland, Northern Cities Round Table
Rebecca Lafreniere, City of San Diego LEA
George Nakamura, CCLHO
Greg Pirie, Bay Area Round Table
Howard Levenson, CIWMB
Mindy Fox, CIWMB
Mark De Bie, CIWMB
Rachel Morton, CIWMB
Bob Holmes, CIWMB
Sue Markie, CIWMB
Bobbie Garcia, CIWMB
Becky Williams, CIWMB
Sharon Anderson, CIWMB

Next EAC Meeting: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 in Anaheim, 8:00-10:30 a.m.

II. Agenda Review


  • Mike Schmaeling graciously provided snacks for this meeting. Thank you.
  • Carolyn Hawkins has postponed her surgery and will be attending the LEA/CIWMB Conference in May.

Late additions:

  • Ralph Hunter Memorial Award
  • t-MAC Resolution

(Note: The majority of this meeting will be a discussion of the Proposed Regulation Package A, agenda item VI.)

III. Approval of Previous Minutes

Corrections to the January 20, 2005 minutes: Page 4, Item K, corrected spelling for term; Page 5, Item E, replace Question marks (???) with “No discussion of this item”; Page 5, Item A (top paragraph on page), replace the word regulations with legislation.

A motion was made and seconded (Altman/Grossberg) to approve the minutes from the January 20, 2005 EAC meeting. Corrected minutes were approved.

IV. EAC Resolutions: Status and Updates

  • 2005-01 - “Training and Certification of Landfill Managers and Inspectors”: Is scheduled to come before the Board at the April Meeting, D. Ferrier and G. Nakamura scheduled to attend. Further discussion later if time permits.
  • 2005-02 - “Toolbox Maintenance Advisory Committee (t-MAC): Tabled due to time constraints.

V. CIWMB Topics, Updates and Discussion

A. “Regulations/Legislation” - Bob Holmes reporting

  • “Long Term Gas Package”: An additional 15-day comment period has been requested.
  • “Gas Regulations for Active Sites”: Will begin to gather information for formal regulations proposal.
  • “Bio-Reactor Regulations”: Will request a 15-day comment period sometimes next week.
  • AB-1333: Prohibiting land application of grease-wastes, which leaves the LEA’s and landfill’s out of it.
  • AB-1065: Less involved than AB-1333.
  • AB-1090, Conversion Technologies: The definition and hierarchy was raised once again, so that jurisdictions would be able to claim diversion credits again.
  • AB-727: Similar to AB-1090
  • AB-926: Would allow jurisdictions beneficial use of 75% of all bio-solids by 2010.

B. “Training and LEA Conference” - Mindy Fox reporting

“A-Z Solid Waste Permit Process” classes starting in:

  • Santa Ana - March 9-10
  • Los Angeles - March 22-23
  • Sacramento - April 5-6
  • Redding - June 1-2
  • San Diego - June 7-8

“Health & Safety 8-Hour Refresher”: Classes have started and continue to proceed on schedule.

“Public Workshop on Fire in Solid Waste Piles”: Scheduled for March 29, 2005 in Sacramento. Promises to be entertaining with guest speakers Ruben Grijalva, State Fire Marshal; Tim Casagrande, CA Conference of Directors of Environmental Health; & Board Members Mulé and Marin.

“Package A”: Workshops scheduled for Sacramento on April 4, and Diamond Bar on April 7, 2005.

“LEA Conference”: All LEA e-mail to go out today with conference brochure and registration materials.

C. “California Performance Review and the Governor’s Proposal”

  • The Governor’s plan has been withdrawn and awaits further decision.
  • Board Member Linda Moulton-Patterson is out.
  • Board Member Michael Paparian was not re-appointed by the Governor for the environmental seat.
  • Scott Harvey, a solid waste lobbyist from San Diego, is reportedly being considered for the public-at-large seat.
  • Board Members Mulé and Marin have until April to be confirmed by the Senate to their appointed Seats.

VI. EAC Discussion Items

“Ralph Hunter Award”: To date, no submittals have been received for this year’s award. Discussed sending out an all LEA e-mail requesting submittals, and extending the submittal due date one week to March 21, 2005. Review and voting to be conducted by e-mail so that a possible candidate can be announced on the conference brochure.

Results of Roundtable Discussions of “Transfer Station Permit Requirements for Cal-Trans/Public Works Maintenance Yards”: Central Valley and Los Angeles County/City permits all (under notification or chipping & grinding) while most others only on an “as needed” basis. Further discussion on the “need to regulate”, and the problems they cause warranted, yet low priority for most. Questions of how will programs be funded, and manpower to go looking for sites brought up. Possible form letter by Matt Fore to be used as a template for education and enforcement.

Regulation Package A - Sub-Agenda presented by B. Garcia:

Regulation proposals are very drafty and subject to changes. M. De Bie provided an introduction to the agenda with an overview of the scope for the meeting, and how we got to this point. Once the issues are presented, can the EAC members align themselves with the given approach by giving its approval? If not, then identify what are the specific issues that are preventing concurrence. Time permitting, problem solving of these specific issues can be undertaken.

There are six issues in Package A (the first three are considered minor) and are identified as follows:

  1. Community Outreach Efforts
  2. 5-year Permit Review Noticing
  3. Surprise, Random Inspections
  4. Verification of Local Land Use
  5. Informational Noticing and Public Meetings
  6. Significant Change


  1. Community Outreach Efforts

    It was agreed that it is the operators’ responsibility to conduct outreach programs, but if you know they are happening, keep a record of it. Records do not have to be very detailed either.

    Take in flexibility on wording when drafting language to reflect possible efforts.

    A general consensus was reached. More details on issues brought up during discussion and potential implementation questions to be addressed later.

  2. 5-year Permit Review Noticing

    It was agreed that it was an LEA permit, and to reinforce that, LEA’s should be uniform in notifying operators. LEA’s already notify full permits, not much of a problem to add registration permits. Small LEA’s with data base management problems could be augmented by LEA support team sending reminders, or other options. As an example, LEA’s could draft a standard form letter for use.

  3. Surprise, Random Inspections

    Discussed changing the words may vs. will and whenever vs. wherever. Legal issues with inspection authority also discussed. By applying principles to all inspections, wording is vague enough to allow flexibility at rural sites, locked or security controlled sites, need for appointments, or sensitive areas, and can be addressed in the Enforcement Program Plan.

  4. Verification of Local Land Use

    The committee found inconsistencies with conditional use permits (CUP) and solid waste facility permits (SWFP). So what are the LEA’s obligations relative to CUP conditions and the determination that a SWFP application is “correct and complete”?

    After a lengthy discussion, it was agreed that additional clarification of this item is necessary, possibly by inclusion of a problem statement similar to some of the other issues previously discussed. It was also suggested that examples be included. M De Bie will draft the documentation regarding this issue and will circulate the revisions, via e-mail, to the EAC for comment.

  5. Informal Noticing and Public Meetings

    Allows a level of noticing for each type of permit (new, revised, and modified), while offering an opportunity for the public to hear what’s going on and enter its comments.

    Most jurisdictions have a process for requesting public information and conducting public forums.

    Possibility exists to add the posting of modified permits to the CIWMB web site.

  6. Significant Change

    M. De Bie gave examples of flow chart analysis with 5 or 6 questions to ask in order to determine if a facility qualifies for an report of facility information (RFI) amendment, a modified permit, or a revised permit.

    Extensive discussion on the process and definition of significant change with further examples of restrictive vs. loose permits.

VII.  Public Comment Period:

Comments were received during discussion of regulation package A.

VIII. Miscellaneous

Due to time constraints, a request by D. Ferrier to discuss communications with the Board, space limitations and possible use of electronic copies for Reports of Facility Information and other documents will be placed on the next agenda.

Meeting adjourned at 3:07 p.m.

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: May 24, 2005
Enforcement Advisory Council (EAC)
Leta Forland: (916) 341-6395