California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

CDI Resources

Unique Requirements

“Source Separated”/”Separated for Reuse”
1st Part Test [14 CCR 17381(e), (k), and (y)]

  • The two terms “source separated”/”separated for reuse” establish one requirement known as the 1st Part of the three-part test and clarifies that recyclable materials and CDI debris are different from municipal solid waste (MSW). To pass this test, it must be demonstrated that the material has not been mixed with other waste types prior to receipt at a operation or facility.

1 Percent Putrescible Wastes [14 CCR 17381(e), (k)]

  • The restriction of 1 percent putrescible wastes is recognition of the fact that putrescible wastes can pose a significant risk to public health, safety, and the environment and, therefore, any site receiving putrescible wastes should be appropriately regulated. The appropriate set of regulations for sites transferring or processing putrescible wastes are the MSW transfer/processing regulations. As it is infeasible to require 0 percent putrescible the threshold of 1 percent is used. However, any amount of putrescible material that creates a nuisance is not allowed at CDI debris sites.

“CD-Like” [14 CCR 17381(e)(3)]

  • CDI debris processing facilities may accept debris only from certain sources, specifically from construction and demolition sites, but also from the manufacturing of materials from construction work, such as wood leftovers from cabinetmakers or truss manufacturers as well as leftover debris from other manufacturers of construction material. The subsection also limits putrescibles to zero and does not allow any residual waste, thereby making this subsection more stringent than requirements for traditional recycling centers.

Expanded Definition of “Processing” [14 CCR 17381(v)]

  • This requirement was added at the March 18, 2003, Board meeting (transcript page 203-206). The expanded definition of “processing” includes four new terms, “chipping, grinding, shredding or baling.” This definition clarifies the activities that constitute processing.
  • Although CDI debris recycling centers may shred or bale as a routine activity, including these activities in the definition will not change operation procedures or facility placement in the permit tiers, as transfer only of CDI debris to disposal is not specifically prohibited in this regulation.

Surprise Random Inspections [17383.4; 17383.5(h); 17383.6(g)]

  • This provision was added at the direction of the Board to require that EAs employ surprise and random inspections. Although not required in current regulations, Board staff guidance to EAs has been that inspections should be unannounced and random, and that is the common practice.
  • This regulation mandates that current practice. The purpose is to increase the effectiveness of inspections, that is, to reduce the likelihood that an operator will “dress up” the facility for the sake of the inspection, rather than always conducting operations consistent with state and local requirements.

Scales [17383.3(k); 17383.4(i); 17383.5(l); 17383.6(j); 17383.7(j); 17383.8(i)]

  • Weight records based on scale measures are required only at medium volume CDI facilities.

Limitation on Residual [17383.5(a)]

  • The Board imposed this requirement on only medium-volume CDI debris processing facilities. Those facilities must obtain a Registration permit. This requirement imposes a 40% limitation on a monthly basis on residual material received by an operator. In effect, it obligates the operator to recycle 60% of the incoming tonnage received per month by weight. The EA must take appropriate enforcement action should the operator exhibit a pattern and practice of failing to comply with this requirement. This enforcement action would result in the operator being required to obtain a full permit pursuant to section 17383.5(k). See “three strikes”.

“Three Strikes” [17383.5(k)]

  • With the addition of 17383.5(k) the operator of a medium volume CDI debris processing site operating under a Registration permit would be required to apply for a full permit if the EA finds three violations of any of the criteria that allows the site to qualify for a registration permit with in a two-year period. These criteria include the maximum amount of residual material sent off site for disposal (40%), the amount of material allowed on site at any one time (maximum of 5250 tons), and the maximum amount of daily tonnage (175 tons/day). This requirement also indicates that the EA shall issue a cease a desist order that a minimum requires the operator to cease accepting material until the noted violation(s) has been corrected.
  • This requirement is designed to address situations where an operator may go beyond the limits of the tier requirements. This situation may become a chronic with the operator repeatedly 3 times within 2 years. This requirement specifies the maximum amount of times permits limits could be surpassed and the specific results of this situation. This requirement sets a standard for determining when a site is required to move to the next higher tier permit reflective of the changed and expanded operations at the site.
  • In summary in the standard required the following:
    • Three violations of tier limits with in two years requires moving to next tier
    • EA shall require that no additional waste to be accepted until operator returns to tier limits
    • Operator must apply for a full permit.

Public Hearing [17383.10]

This section has been deleted.

IIPP in Application [17386(a)(18); 18223(a)(19); 18223.5(a)(19)]

  • This provision was added at the direction of the Board to facilitate the EA’s role in promoting worker safety at sites subject to these regulations. Injury and Illness Prevention Programs (IIPP) are required of employers pursuant to Title 8 CCR 3203. Current Board regulations for MSW transfer/processing operations and facilities require that the IIPP be maintained in the site’s records and be available for inspection by the EA (this requirement does not apply to other types of facilities the Board regulates.) In the case of C&D/Inert debris processing facilities, the Board felt it appropriate to emphasize the importance of the IIPP by requiring it to be submitted with the operator’s application for a permit. The Board recognizes that worker safety is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). Indeed, some might argue that AB 1220 would preclude the Board from imposing this requirement. Nonetheless, the Board determined that requiring the IIPP in the operator’s application for a permit will help focus the operator’s attention on the importance of the IIPP.

Fire Prevention Plan [17386(a); 18233(a)(19); 18223.5(a)(20)]

  • The greatest risk to public health and safety and the environment arising from CDI debris processing activities is fire. The Board decided to impose more stringent fire prevention requirements on such activities to address their greater risk of fire. The requirements are as follows:
  1. Description of the measures the operator will take to prevent fires and to control and extinguish fires at the site;
  2. Identification and description of the equipment the operator will have available (on site and readily available off-site) to control and extinguish fires;
  3. Description of the measures the operator will take to mitigate the impacts of any fire at the site to the public health and safety and the environment;
  4. Description of the arrangements the operator has made with the local fire control authority having jurisdiction to provide fire prevention, control and suppression;
  5. Discussion of the ability of the local fire control authority to suppress fires at the site in light of the authority's personnel, expertise and equipment, the availability of water, access to the site and to flammable materials on the site, the nature of flammable materials on site, the quantity and dimensions of materials on the site, and the potential for subsurface fires in accumulations of flammable materials on the site.
  6. Evidence that the operator has submitted the plan to the local fire control authority for review and that the authority has found it to be in compliance with the authority's applicable requirements.
Last updated: June 30, 2010
Melissa Hoover-Hartwick: (916) 341-6813