California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting

Minutes: January 19, 2006

Meeting called to order 9:36 a.m.

I. Introductions

Bill Prinz: Southern Cities Roundtable
Leonard Grossberg: South Western Roundtable
Robert McClellon: North Central Roundtable
Matt Fore: South Central Roundtable
Patti Henshaw: Southern Roundtable
Carolyn Hawkins: Northern Roundtable
Greg Pirie: Bay Area Roundtable
George Nakamura: CCLHO/CCCLEA
Bob Holmes:CIWMB
Rachel Morton: CIWMB
Sharon Anderson: CIWMB Rep.
Mark DeBie: CIWMB
Howard Levenson: CIWMB
Rosalie Mulé: CIWMB Board Member
Paulino Luna: CIWMB
Mindy Fox: CIWMB
John Bell: CIWMB
Suzanne Hambleton: CIWMB
Wendy Breckon: CIWMB
Ken Stuart: CIWMB
Susan Markie: CIWMB
Karl Palmer: DTSC
John Cupp: Consultant

Next EAC Meeting: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 in Sacramento; scheduled for 9:30 a.m.-3:30 p.m.

II. Agenda Review

Item V-C “E-Filing data to CIWMB and SWIS Database Accessibility”: Postponed until next EAC meeting, as Dennis Ferrier will not be in attendance today.

III. Approval of Previous Minutes

A motion was made and seconded (Nakamura/Hawkins) to approve the minutes from the November 30, 2005 EAC meeting. Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote.

IV. EAC Resolutions: Status and Updates

Nothing new to report.

V. EAC Discussion Items

A. Regulations for Permit Implementation-Status of Work Group on Significant Change (Mark De Bie) handout

Review of the latest handout with two lists. Number one (1) is minor changes–everyone in the workgroup agreed on what would be minor for 8 items, and added additional items for further discussion. Number two (2) is significant changes–where permit revisions would be needed. Only four items were agreed upon, and the remaining items are open for further discussion. (List is open for comments during the open comment period.)

Maybe a return to the “decision tree” system would be in order because it allows LEA’s discretion and seems to flow easier. The question was raised, “Do we want to have a list in the regulations, and does that make it better/worse for the LEA’s and/or operators?" It was recommended to bring the discussion to the roundtables with specific examples, and then form a position by consensus with the EAC detailing issues and concerns.

Anyone asked to comment on or work with in a private or public group discussion regarding proposed regulations should notify their EAC representative.

Public comments on this issue indicate that the operators interpret the regulations as “any change” (with significant dropped out) substantially limits the discretion of the LEA’s.

Further discussion and actions were tabled until the next EAC meeting so that comments from the roundtables could be gathered.

B. Board’s Role in Broader LEA and Facility Operator Training (Mindy Fox)

Report from Mindy is that the presentation to the Board meeting on December 13, 2005 was very successful!

C. E-Filing Data to CIWMB and SWIS Database Accessibility (D. Ferrier)

Item postponed until next scheduled EAC meeting.

D. Electronic Excel Inspection Forms (Bill Prinz/Carolyn Hawkins)

Several LEA’s report receiving new forms in triplicate, even though they didn’t request them or use them in large numbers. New electronic forms require Acrobat Reader 7.0 in order to save information entered. Some LEA’s also reported having problems typing data in, super-imposed sentences, and saving data. Board staff promised corrections and controls to these issues.

E. CalEPA Enforcement Initiative, Prosecutorial Referral (Wendy Breckon)

Prosecutor quarterly meetings are trying to put together protocols on environmental task force participation. LEA’s will need to review their enforcement program plans (EPP) to see if changes are needed in order to comply (good topic for next series of roundtables).

Coordination and knowledge of inter-agency functions helps in putting together and filing cases with stronger fines and penalties (remember-solid waste regulations allow endless appeals to hearing panels). The feeling is that there seems to be a need to make the LEA’s more like the certified unified program agency (CUPA) model.

A request was made to the Board staff to facilitate the roundtables with what is available, and give direction/guidance in answering the question “How do we improve our ability to conduct enforcement?”

F. LEA/CIWMB Joint Facility Inspections (Bill Prinz)

On several occasions, differences between LEA’s and Board Staff inspections have brought up issues that are significant in difference and question the EIR/Negative Declaration status. The joint inspections are supposed to be side-by-side inspections every 18 months to “calibrate” the LEA’s. There should be better communication and discussion between the inspectors to agree on the differences. A request to Board Staff was made to send the inspector early so as to get up to speed on time. Another roundtable discussion item, permit pre-inspection issues.

G. Proposed Regulations Modifying Existing Active Disposal Site Gas Monitoring and Control Regulations (Patti Henshaw/John Bell)

The workgroup identified five items that are significant:

  1. At closed sites, concurrent action with Board (request time frame when Board shall act)
  2. Documents reviewed and approved by LEA prior to implementation
  3. Operator impact–within 1,000 feet of trash, borings should be at depth of trash and not at the lowest point of the landfill.
  4. The levels to regulate trace gases are not given.
  5. Action plans on methane gas releases are not reviewed by the LEA’s, and they should be!

The Board approved the formal 45-day comment period last December. Patti requested comments directed to her in order to submit a concise list of comments under an EAC Resolution during the formal comment period.

H. Other Issues From Roundtables

None to report.

VI. CIWMB Topics, Updates and Discussion

A. Legislation/Regulations (Bob Holmes)

  • AB 1688: Establishes an Illegal Dumping Enforcement Officer with arrest powers
  • SB 411: (Alarcon) Establishes that green and woody waste would count as disposal.
  • AB 1497: Continuing
  • Gas Regulations: Continuing
  • Clean-up of stipulated agreements on non-declared emergency issues (What is a temporary emergency and what isn’t?) Need an EAC volunteer to focus comments.
  • Financial assurance clean-up package (past insurance issues stemming from BKK)
  • Extended Storage piles
  • Inflation/Deflation of cost estimates on closures

B. PR 410 South Coast Air Quality Management District Proposed Rule on Odors at Material Recovery Facilities and Transfer Stations (Bob Holmes)

This issue is on the back burner right now, and next update/discussion is scheduled in April 2006.

C. Proposed FDA ban on Certain Cattle Parts As Animal Feed (Bob Holmes)

This would affect the rendering industry greatly, as they would have to find a place to dispose of the material.

D. Landfill Gas Monitoring Well Viability And Its Effects on Greenhouse Gas Emissions (John Bell)

Continued study on effectiveness of gas monitoring probes in wells. Looking at specific sites, specific probes, depth, age of the probes, etc.

Good news, the equipment will be available after the study (end of next fiscal year).

E. Enforcement Toolbox Development (Paulino Luna) handout

Toolbox survey form–Feedback by 01-25-06 identifies state minimum standards, yet is not limited to such. They should be able to address all forms of enforcement at a later date.

Suggested to change the name to “Compliance Toolbox”!

F. Training and LEA Conference (Mindy Fox)

  • Certification of landfill operator option is no longer on the regulations proposal table.
  • CIWMB has approved $150,000 annual increase for training program (guidance and training document translation from English to other languages may be the start of it).
  • Looking at continuing education units (CEU’s) for registered environmental health specialist (REHS) training.
  • LEA/CIWMB Conference: Defining the sessions and speakers for Monterey
  • Allowing spacing on multi-day trainings to facilitate travel by LEA’s (done!)
  • “Health & Safety Training” Southern Calif./Central Valley dates coming soon.

G. Certified Appliance Recyclers (Karl Palmer) handout

Legislation passed last year, effective January of 2006. Person removing hazardous components from appliances must be registered with Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) as a certified appliance recycler (CAR). Prior to crushing appliances, the crusher must demonstrate that a CAR has completed hazardous component removal. DTSC has received ~ 130 applications to date—98 have been approved. Applications are one page and simple, no fees are involved. Certification packages will go from DTSC to CUPA’s. Neither DTSC nor CUPA’s expect this to be very high on CUPA’s priority lists. “CUPA’s shall inspect to the extent practicable.” Quote from regulations?

Two primary issues: 1) metal shredders are afraid that they can’t accept abandoned appliances, and can’t process them because no certified CAR around. They can become CAR themselves. And then what does one do with hazardous components? Store and transport properly. 2) Who has to be certified is confusing to some. See FAQ’s to be up on DTSC website very soon.

Shredders industry to sponsor a bill in response. DTSC would like comments from all affected parties so that, if there is an opportunity to change what the bill has set in place, more players can be closer to being on same page next time legislation is proposed.

Call Karl or Sarah Scott on number on fact sheet for information or to make comments.

H. State/Local Illegal Dumping Enforcement Task Force (Ken Stuart)

Discussion on what is needed by locals to help bring items to the task force. Illegal dumping is enforceable in the penal code but illegal disposal is not! Hardest hit is the public works departments. Best tools: mandatory collection ordinances, waste hauler permits and vehicle impoundment authority.

Gathering lists and groups on task forces (Parks and Rec., Public Works, District Attorney, already on-board) for CSAC and League of Cities.

I. DTSC Draft Lead Report (Karl Palmer)

Announced at last EAC meeting. Is causing DTSC to consider lowering total threshold limit concentration from 1000 ppm to 250 or 500 ppm. Karl says all hazardous waste total threshold limit concentration's (TTLC) are at least 20 years old and DTSC thinks it’s prudent to set thresholds on health-based model results rather than on drinking water standards (risk-based). There’s no proposal to change soluble level threshold and it’s the soluble levels that determine disposal options. Total threshold concerns safe levels for direct contact. After TTLC change, (requires regulations change) then it’s likely that further regulation changes will follow that would address handling & disposal of Lead contaminated wastes. This is likely to be a long-term process. See DTSC web site for draft report. Mark de Bie suggests that handling & disposal regulations follow closely on the heels of changes to thresholds.

J. LEA Authority at Rail Haul Transfer Stations (Leonard Grossberg)

No Action/Nothing new to report.

K. Universal Waste Guidance (Karl Palmer)

Karl gave an overview of the history since 2001 legislation and an overview of the reactions from various stakeholders: DTSC’s positions: DTSC can’t fix the fiscal problems involved or resulting from legislation. If the ban were extended, nothing would change in terms of infrastructure development. DTSC does not think that Subtitle D landfills are a safe place for these wastes.

The cathode ray tube (CRT) ban led to infrastructure and market development. Enforcing the universal waste ban at a household level is not a high priority for DTSC. They will continue to triage and prioritize all the complaints and enforcement cases they get.

DTSC has been in contact with the household hazardous waste (HHW) operators throughout the state. HHW don’t think they will have a big influx of waste for disposal or materials to be recycled. DTSC is going out on the road to help educate and will take suggestions for venues and audiences (HHW’s, LEA Round Tables, CUPA’s etc.) DTSC is working with CIWMB and CUPA’s on outreach.

What is an electronic device?
The ones that DTSC tested and observed fail the toxicity tests. (See the definition of electronic device Title 22, section 66273.9). Karl says “If you have a device like this, it’s likely hazardous.” This is as close as DTSC is going to come to a list, in the near future anyway. An electronic device is not “anything with a cord or anything with a circuit board” although there are groups (Californians Against Waste) making this leap. Look for future legislative effort to provide more opportunities to handle this stuff.

Bob Holmes, CIWMB: See the Waste Board guidance letter that was issued January 11th. Further questions are coming in from LEA’s so look forward to further clarification from CIWMB on LEA guidance. Hard copies of the CIWMB guidance went out to all facility operators. It’s a good idea for LEAs to e-mail or copy to local operators as the hard copy mailings may have gone only to corporate headquarters in some cases.

Patti Henshaw: Plans to note on next LEA inspection reports: “Operator is aware of changes in regulations and has been given information.”

Howard Levenson: Stay tuned to DTSC and CIWMB websites for links, lists etc.

Mark de Bie: Will suggest that this waste type be included in CIWMB-offered load check trainings. To LEAs: Are the facility operators doing something to try to accommodate this regulation change? Are they making an effort with signs or brochures or employee training, etc? Consider this during inspections. It’s going to be a group effort: haulers, operators, households, LEA’s, CUPA’s HHW’s etc. and it will take time.

Karl: biggest challenge is the fluorescent lamps. The collection infrastructure is not very good. They are fragile. Rural counties will have the biggest impacts and the toughest time with this. Hawkins suggested that DTSC direct its efforts to assist toward rural areas, as the large corporations in urban areas are likely to have better communication and handling ability. Again, Karl is open to feedback to take back to his director.

Suggestion: Local communities should build collection of these items into their franchise hauler contracts. The best idea is to collect them curbside at the front end. This is more likely to happen in urban areas.

VII.  Public Comments:

None.

VIII. Meeting was adjourned at 3:32 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: March 21, 2006
Enforcement Advisory Council (EAC) http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LEA/EACouncil/
Leta Forland: Leta.Forland@calrecycle.ca.gov (916) 341-6395