California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting

Minutes: December 4, 2012

CalEPA Building
1001 I Street

Meeting called to order at 9:35 a.m.

I. Introductions

Lars Seifert, Chair, Southern Roundtable
Lisa Todd, Vice-Chair, North Central Roundtable
Linda Johnson, Vice-Chair, Southern Cities
Pete Oda, South Western Roundtable
Paul Tavares, Northern Cities
Marina Winslow, Northern Roundtable
Joe Doser, CCLHO (Health Officers)
Gregg Pirie, Bay Area Roundtable (outgoing)
Janet Gardner, South Central Roundtable
Vacant Position, Contract Counties
Vacant Position, CalRecycle EA
Chris Rummel, Bay Area Roundtable

Mark de Bie,CalRecycle
Lorraine Van Kekerix, CalRecycle
Kevin Taylor, CalRecycle
Sharon Anderson, CalRecycle
Bonnie Cornwall, CalRecycle
Georgianne Turner, CalRecycle
Sue Markie, CalRecycle
Bob Holmes, CalRecycle
Ken Decio, CalRecycle
Mike Wochnick, CalRecycle
Karen Denz, CalRecycle
Cody Oquendo, CalRecycle
Leslie Graves, State Water Board

Next EAC Meeting: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 in Sacramento from 9:30 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

Minutes by Lisa Todd.

Some of the agenda items presented below were discussed out of order. Meeting Break for Lunch 11:50 a.m.-1:10 p.m.

II. Agenda Review

The items Multiple Owners at CIA sites and EA Notification for Research Composting were added to the agenda.

III. Approval of Previous Minutes:

A motion was made and seconded (Doser/Johnson) to correct the date of the next meeting on the draft from the 3rd to the 4th of December 2012 and to approve the minutes of the September 26, 2012 EAC meeting. The minutes were approved by a unanimous vote.

  • Mr. Pirie indicated that Chris Rummel was taking over now as the EAC representative from the Bay Area as he was stepping down. Mr. Seifert noted that the membership roster would be updated to reflect this change.
  • Mr. Seifert read the EAC Mission Statement since he as chair, as well as the vice chairs, assumed their new roles on this date and new regional representatives were in attendance. (Paraphrased here) The purpose of the EAC is to advise and assist CalRecycle, the California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health (CCDEH) Solid Waste Policy Committee (SWPC), and the LEA Roundtables when requested or when, in the opinion of the EAC, advice to those entities is warranted and appropriate. Mr. Seifert indicated that the roundtables were an extension of this group and we want to share the discussions that happen at these meetings with the roundtables and to bring items for discussion from the roundtables to this group to foster two way communication that includes CalRecycle.
  • Mr. Oda requested to discuss the issue of multiple ownerships at CIA sites with respect to inspection frequency and that CalRecycle cannot do “subsets” of SWIS numbers. Mr. Seifert added this item for preliminary discussion to the end of the first agenda item about partially closed sites. Mr. Rummel requested to add an item on EA Notifications for research at existing permitted sites. In Santa Clara Co. they have received notifications that among other things, conflict with the permit conditions that restrict waste types. The item was added at the end of the morning agenda. Mr. Seifert requested that members get agenda items in sooner than later if possible.

IV. EAC Resolutions Status and Updates

A. Partial Closed Site Inspections

  • Mr. Seifert gave background of this issue that was discussed primarily at the Southern roundtables. Approximately 60 active landfills in the state have partially closed units, some of which have preliminary post closure maintenance plans for these separately designated units. When CalRecycle consolidated the partially closed and active units at several landfills to one unit in SWIS, the ability of LEA’s to fill out two inspection forms, one for active and another for closed sites, went away. San Diego County put together draft comments on the inspection of closed units at active sites that was distributed for consideration prior to the EAC meeting. They reviewed the closed site standards as compared to the Active Disposal Facility Report (From 52) to evaluate the adequacy of using the active site form in recording closed site violations. The comment letter suggests replacing the 14CCR section, specific to waste tire storage and disposal, with space for an “Other” section where closure standards could be typed in as applicable. Mr. Seifert relayed the sentiment from the roundtables that it isn’t working to “shoehorn” violations of closure standards into the “Site Maintenance” section of the active disposal site form.
  • Mr. de Bie indicated that the paper doesn’t really address the “shoehorning” issue and doesn’t explain why it doesn’t work.
  • Mr. Wochnick shared that the standard for final cover, for example, is a construction standard and not an operational standard. Once the CQA indicates that the standard has been met there is no longer a need to verify the standard.
  • Mr. Seifert discussed that many of the closed site standards say “designed and maintained”. The issue arises when the site (or cover) is not being maintained properly. He described an example of final cover failing after a one hundred year flood.
  • Ms. Markie inquired about when the LEA can require an operator to update a post closure maintenance plan (PCMP). Mr. Wochnick explained that this can happen at the five year permit review or sooner if there is an issue and the plan is inadequate. He indicated that major changes in a PCMP also needed to be reflected in the Financial Assurances.
  • Mr. de Bie stated that while we need to view a as site active until it is completely closed, we do want to encourage active sites to close cells when possible as they move toward closure. He suggested that CalRecycle staff give the issue more thought before coming back to the EAC with comments on San Diego’s draft. He added that if, after distribution of San Diego’s draft and discussion at the upcoming roundtables, there is anything else that needs to be added for consideration, that LEA’s let CalRecycle know as soon as possible.
  • Mr. Seifert directed EAC members to add this item to their roundtable agendas and to get comments to him with copies to Ms. Markie as soon as possible following the roundtables.
  • Mr. Seifert requested that another closure standard, final grading (21142), be added to San Diego’s list of sections for consideration.
  • Mr. Wochnick suggested that a simple solution might be to add the post closure maintenance standard 21180 to the active site form as a “catch all” standard for maintenance issues.
  • Mr. Oda commented that documenting erosion or drainage control issues at Puente Hills, associated with the partially closed areas of the landfill, was handled in the “comments” section of the inspection form.

B. Multiple Owners at CIA Sites were Discussed as an Add-on to this Item

  • Mr. Oda discussed the issue of documenting inspections at CIA sites with multiple owners where inspections take more than one day to complete and the form captures the date of the first inspection.
  • Ms. Gardner said that, for the Fresno Co. site with 100 owners, she does an overall site inspection one day and focused inspections of the separately owned properties.
  • Mr. de Bie indicated that another option to explore might be amending the current inspection form for all facility types to allow you to enter a date range.

C. CIWMB Enforcement Advisory (March 1997)

  • Mr. Seifert brought up the need to revise the advisory which is now outdated as statutes have changed. He indicated that it would be helpful for LEA’s to be able to reference a published document to a judge that would lend credibility to local enforcement procedures.
  • Ms. Turner indicated that the issue of revising the guidance document came up at a previous conference session on enforcement penalties but the response from the audience was mixed. She indicated that the trend now is more web-based. Her section is already working on providing enforcement program plan (EPP) guidance for enforcement so it is a good time to review what’s on the website and what needs more work. She said that the penalty issue would require the most time and would need more input from the roundtables. She said that model EPP language could be developed and made available to LEA’s to use or modify at their discretion. The model language could perhaps replace the current advisory.
  • Mr. de Bie noted that currently, the EPP goes through a review process and an approval letter is sent to LEA’s when CalRecycle review is complete. Ms. Turner added that the approval language could be more pronounced and could state that the LEA’s enforcement program has been reviewed and meets the requirements established by the state under Title 14.
  • Mr. de Bie suggested that there are several approaches that could be taken to address different enforcement strategies. One stems from the partnership effort stressing compliance first. Another idea is to have LEA’s develop a work plan that CalRecycle would approve as part of the EPP. He questioned if updating an advisory might be controversial.
  • Mr. Seifert indicated that the only issue he sees is if an advisory is needed or if the information is already currently available to LEA’s. Ms. Turner said that she could come back to the group at the next meeting with some ideas on the topic.

D. Small-Scale Composting: Food Facilities, Culinary Gardens, Community Gardens

  • Mr. Pirie reported that some high end restaurants in Napa are starting to do their own culinary gardens. He and others got in contact with the local Ag department and came up with best management practices (BMP). Restaurants are required to get their food from “approved sources”. He is compiling BMP’s for small scale composters for the SWPC. EAC members should solicit information from their roundtable for inclusion in this guidance document that Mr. Pirie expressed that he will be completing within the next month.
  • Mr. Doser expressed concern over regulation of desiccators that are starting to show up in large businesses with their own food service facilities.
  • Ms. Cornwall suggested that the California Restaurant Association be brought into the discussion. Mr. de Bie stated that the guidance document could be used by local recycling and solid waste staff to advise the public on how to compost as well.
  • Mr. Pirie stated that the main issues are potable water sources, vector attraction, contamination sources and run-off. He also said that food waste is often improperly handled when composting since not enough carbonaceous material is added to achieve the necessary C:N ratio.
  • Mr. de Bie discussed that a regulation is being worked on that would spell out, as part of the “excluded activities” section, what composting is excluded from regulation and would give examples of commonly excluded local projects for easier reference by the public. Mr. Holmes indicated that there are three small scale exclusions that have been looked at including schools and community gardens.

The item EA Notification for Research Composting was Added to the Agenda by Chris Rummel

  • Mr. Rummel described how compost facilities with full permits in Santa Clara County have submitted EA Notifications to add research composting operations on the site of the existing facility. In some cases these research operations propose to compost food waste and municipal solid waste in open windrows, activities not allowed in the current California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents or solid waste facility permits.
  • Mr. de Bie indicated that guidance has been given to LEA’s that they have the discretion to issue multiple permits or to have the operator revise their current solid waste facility permit to include any new operations or waste streams. The LEA can determine that the EA Notification does not qualify as a research project as written. Mr. Seifert added that if the proposed “research” is not affiliated with an educational institution or have specific research aims then the LEA can state that the project is not eligible.

D. California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health (CCDEH) Establishment of Medical Waste TAC

  • Mr. Seifert discussed the last Solid Waste Policy Committee meeting and the chair, Becky Ng, calling for the formation of a medical waste technical advisory committee (TAC). Mr. Doser described how a private company has drafted a revised version of the Medical Waste Management Act that will be submitted as a bill during the current legislative session.

V. CalRecycle Discussion Items

A. Deputy Director Report (Mark de Bie)

  • The Governor has appointed a new Chief Deputy of CalRecycle, Ken DaRosa, who is currently with the Department of Finance.
  • CalRecycle has been invited to participate in the update of the Air Resources Board’s scoping plan to reduce greenhouse gases and will be looking at the waste issues in the plan and specifically recycling opportunities that could potentially reduce greenhouse gases. The plan is scheduled for roll out in mid-2013. In addition, AB 1900 outlines how CalRecycle will work with the Board and Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) on an analysis of biogas injection into pipelines throughout the state that will convey the biogas to homes as well as businesses. CalRecycle will be looking at potential health effects from biogas substituents and how to mitigate any potential adverse impacts.
  • Mr. de Bie discussed participation in the State Water Board working group on the proposed general order for compost sites and the CEQA document.
  • The new appeal process for the tire enforcement program that involves appeals going to the CalRecycle Director, and no longer to an ALJ, goes into effect January 1, 2013.
  • Scott Walker is retiring December 14. He will be greatly missed.

B. Update on Illegal Dumping Task Force (ID TAC) meeting on Mattresses (Karen Denz)

  • Ms. Denz provided an overview of the presentation given by three speakers at the last meeting. She reported on how mattresses are recycled and how recyclers are hard to regulate as they can set up shop overnight. The industry groups are looking for data to support producer responsibility legislation. She mentioned that a lot of data is available through local code enforcement agencies and the group may look to provide guidance for local governments regarding how mattresses should be handled prior to being recycled and resources for recycling mattresses. Grant Eisen with Nevada County is the current chair of the TAC, replacing Ken Stuart. The power point presentation will be made available for viewing on the CalRecycle website.

C. Improving Communication with LEA’s and RWQCB (Leslie Graves, State Water Board)

  • Ms. Graves inquired if there was any additional feedback after the conference session. She said that she would bring issues raised to the next State Board roundtable the first week of February. Issues raised by LEA’s included time lines for review and approval of plans in the CalRecycle sections of Title 27 that many regional board staff are not aware of and that cause problems for LEA’s approving plans. Ms. Johnson and Ms. Todd offered to be LEA contacts for any agenda items to bring to Ms. Graves attention. Ms. Markie will be the CalRecycle contact for Ms. Graves.
  • Mr. de Bie suggested that some Regional Boards may wish to host LEA roundtables as a way to foster communication. Ms. Forland will coordinate with Ms. Markie and Ms. Graves to invite regional boards to the LEA roundtables.

D. Draft Regulatory Revisions to Title 14 and 27 (Bob Homes)

  • Mr. Holmes described the transitioning from the public stakeholders meetings on the 14 issues to now deciding what changes to make and putting those changes in one document that will be out early next year. He said that the odor concept was one that needed more thought before taking it back to workshops for feedback. With regard to the meat scrap issue, CalRecycle is still working with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and exploring aspects of the waste stream that can be addressed in regulation.

E. Update on Regulatory Workshops (Bob Holmes)

  • The land application workshop took place in Riverside. CDFA will be defining what agronomic rate and beneficial use are. The LEA could then use this information to determine when illegal disposal is occurring. The rulemaking on this issue will begin next year for this process.
  • Mr. Holmes also reported on the workshops held in Riverside on food and green waste where in vessel digestion and an exclusion for publicly owned treatment works (POTW) was discussed.

F. Legislation Update (Ken Decio)

  • Mr. Decio reported that some extended producer responsibility (EPR) and organics legislation may be pending this year but we have yet to see those introduced as the session has just begun. He reminded everyone of the link to current legislation on the CalRecycle website.
  • Mr. de Bie stated that the governor supports some adjustment to CEQA based on the contention that it has become a barrier to business. Ms. Anderson added that a review of all state regulations, on the same basis, has been proposed.

G. Training (Sharon Anderson)

  • Ms. Anderson gave the training update. Registration for managing meetings trainings in Sacramento and Southern California will go out soon and will be slated for late winter and permitting/CEQA trainings will be scheduled for spring. She indicated that conference evaluations are still being tabulated and there were some real stand out sessions this year. No decision has been made as to the date or location of the next conference as yet but formation of an early planning group/steering committee will be happening soon.
  • Mr. Seifert initiated a discussion about the need for training liaisons from the roundtables. Ms. Anderson stated that the structure is still in place and needed. Mr. de Bie queried the group as to the models for holding short trainings at roundtables that was tested this past year and which model was more effective, speaker in person or on the phone. Most agreed that the in person speaker was preferred if possible and the consensus was that one or two roundtable based trainings would be well received.
  • Ms. Anderson announced that her term as a retired annuitant is ending and she will be going back into retirement. The group expressed appreciation for all of her work in the training section including organizing the recent conference. A replacement is being sought to fill her position.

VI. Public Comments:

No public comments

VII. Next Meeting Scheduled for March 5, 2013 in Sacramento

Meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.

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 26, 2013
Enforcement Advisory Council (EAC)
Leta Forland: (916) 341-6395