Local Enforcement Agency Correspondence

Permitting and Enforcement Committee Workshop July Summary

Date: July 18, 2002

To: All Local Enforcement Agencies

This all LEA e-mail was sent on behalf of Scott Walker, Acting Deputy Director of the Permitting & Enforcement (P&E) Division and the LEA Support Services Branch.

The P&E Committee held the first of several informal workshops during the regularly scheduled committee meeting as part of an on-going effort to gather stakeholder input on policy and business practices to improve the work that we do.

The first workshop focused on efforts to identify and resolve issues for better LEA and CIWMB mutual effectiveness in meeting solid waste management legislative mandates. Please note that these workshops are open to all and will be conducted in a panel format with active dialogue during topic areas, and will include time for public comment at the conclusion of the workshop.

The following is a summary of the first informal workshop held during the July 8, 2002 Permitting and Enforcement (P&E) Committee meeting. There will be a series of these workshops during the next few months.

Should you have any questions or comments on these workshops or would like more information, please contact Sharon Anderson at (916) 341-6391.

P&E Committee Workshop Summary--July 8, 2002 

Panel Members:

Dan Avera, Patti Henshaw, Doug Ames, Paul Manasjan, Gary Erbeck, Mike Schmaeling, Justin Malan, Dennis Ferrier, Ernie Genter, Karen Moroz, Scott Walker, Mark de Bie and Sharon Anderson.

Main Topics of Discussion:

• Local Perspective
• Obstacles and Challenges in Law, Regulation and Policy
• Suggestions to Strengthen Partnership
• Next Steps

Summary:

Discussion of Local Perspective: Some of the issues expressed by LEAs on the panel included difficulties in coordinating local land use issues with agencies that do not routinely deal with solid waste; concern that LEAs’ role to protect public health and safety and the environment is being diluted by having LEAs act as “Diversion Cops;” desire that public health & safety should drive regulations, not market shares; concurrence that LEA de-certification should be used if an LEA is not doing their job and agreement that Partnership 2000 has improved the CIWMB and LEA working relationship.

A few of the issues expressed by the Board members included that regulations were put in place and are still needed to create a more level playing field and eliminate loopholes for pseudo recyclers; LEAs need to equally focus enforcement actions on small operators and publicly operated sites, not just focus on the large private operators; and forums such as MOLO and SWANA certification programs are helping to keep open communication between operators/LEAs and State inspectors by allowing perspectives on solid waste management to be shared.

Discussion of Obstacles and Challenges in Law, Regulation and Policy: Some of the challenges and obstacles expressed by LEAs on the panel included that loopholes are created when regulations are too prescriptive; the decision-making process needs to be given back to the LEA; the tiered permit process does not work and only two permits types should exist, a disposal permit and a transfer/processing permit; the monthly inspection requirement is burdensome and unnecessary for many small and/or compliant facilities; and the key challenge appears to be balancing a level playing field with statewide consistency and challenges can be managed through effective communication.

A few questions posed by the Board members to the panel included the following:

• How can we enhance the LEAs enforcement capabilities in a manner or develop a process similar to the Waste Tire Program?
• What are the unintended consequences caused by the changes that were made by AB 59 to the regulatory framework?

Discussion of Suggestions to Strengthen Partnership: Some of the issues expressed by LEAs on the panel included having Board members visit more sites with the LEA to see a site from the local perspective; enhancement of the funding and Board sensitivity to the special environmental and economic concerns of the rural jurisdictions; utilization of the LEA Conference to revitalize Partnership 2000 for continuous improvement in communications with clear goals and objectives; remove overlap with other agencies such as DTSC which create ineffective waste management programs and Cal/EPA should become involved with the agency overlap issues.

A few of the comments expressed by the Board members included continuing regular unstructured input to the Board such as the workshops; partnership has to go both ways and LEAs need to take responsibility as well; Round Tables, EAC, SWPC, CCDEH meetings and other regular interactions with CIWMB are productive; Partnership 2000 should be updated and continued and LEAs need to get involved and contact Cal/EPA on overlap issues.

Next Steps: The discussion of the next steps included having future workshops to deal with overlap issues among the Cal/EPA agencies or other state agencies on solid waste issues; continuing to send Board members the e-mail updates on Round Table discussions (notes), EAC issues, and other LEA concerns. The workshop ended with the acknowledgement of its success and the need to hold future workshops.

LEA Correspondence Home