Enforcement Advisory Council Meeting

Minutes: December 5, 2006

Meeting called to order 9:36 a.m. by Bill Prinz, temporarily acting as Chair for today's meeting.

I. Introductions

Next EAC Meeting: January 25, 2007 in Sacramento.

II. Agenda Review

No additions. Lunch break will be taken outside the meeting room. III. Approval of Previous Minutes

III. Approval Previous Minutes

Corrections to the September 13, 2006 2nd draft minutes:

• Page 4, V, B-Correct the spelling of “Cancimilla”
• Page 4, V, C, first paragraph-Correct spelling of “councel"
• Page 4, V, C, 2nd paragraph–remove (#2006-07)
• Page 4, V, D, remove (Sharon Anderson)
• Page 5, VI, B. Add “Informal” at the beginning of the 1st sentence
• Page 6, VI, C, SB 1305–date should be 9/1/08 not 1/1/08

A motion was moved, seconded and the minutes for the September 13, 2006 EAC meeting were approved as corrected.

IV. EAC Resolutions: Status and Updates

A. Election of EAC Officer to Fill Remaining Vacancy (and revise Resolution 2006-07):

Matt Fore has taken a new position with Monterey County and resigned as the Chair of the EAC. Additionally, Jackie Adams, the Southern Vice-Chair has also resigned from EAC. Therefore, the EAC needs to elect a new chair and vice-chair. Discussions pursued on who might be interested to take the chair position. Many members’ current workloads dissuaded them from volunteering. Leonard suggested we ask the CCDEH to support EAC members’ possible nominations and support the additional work loads. In the interim, Greg Pirie will chair the next EAC meeting. This motion was moved and seconded. Bill Prinz was nominated as the Southern Co-Vice Chair and he accepted, the motion was moved and seconded.

B. E-filing Data to CIWMB and Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) Database Accessibility-Sub Committee Report:

No new information as Dennis Ferrier was absent.

C. Modifying Existing Active Disposal Site Gas Monitoring and Control Regulations:

Howard gave an update. A public hearing was held on December 4, 2006 in Sacramento. One commenter spoke at the meeting on permitted boundary issues. CIWMB staff will compile all comments received and prepare an item for February’s committee meeting, where staff will request approval of proposed regulations or a 15-day comment period if needed.

V. Other EAC Issues

A. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)-Discussion Last Meeting on Phase II:

Summary of Phase I–No resolution was made regarding clear role of responsible agencies. Phase II could be a discussion for the California County Counsel Association. Bill tried to make contact when the group met in San Diego but only county counsel members can participate–it is a fairly closed group. Issues remain on authority of responsible agency. Ken Stuart indicated that the county counsel works for the Board of Supervisors and that may be a good way to gain support. Rebecca will explore this in San Diego County.

VI. EAC Discussion Items

A. Traffic Numbers in Solid Waste Facility Permits (SWFP)–San Jose’s experience at the Permitting and Enforcement P&E Committee:

Should there be traffic numbers in the permit? How should they be addressed? Traffic studies may not be accurate. Dennis Ferrier had a permit come to the Board and he didn’t include traffic numbers. Although Dennis was not at the meeting, Bill Prinz indicated that Dennis took the idea to the Board that the minimum standards already address this issue without needing it in the permit. Code enforcement can enforce exact traffic numbers. Permits need to be tailored to each site. Traffic studies may not be accurate.

B. New SWIS Forms–LEA Concerns (Migration to New Facility Inspection Report Forms Format [PDF]):

Instruction on how to use PDF forms is needed. Can we have the ability to use different fonts? (Bold for example to emphasize issues to operator?) Need to remove lines from comment box since text does not line up and it appears as strike-out. Can the dot be made larger to identify violations and areas of concern? Currently shows up as a tiny mark when printed. Bernie Vlach stated that he is familiar with these issues and will address them. All LEA e-mail will go out once these comments are addressed. Bill Prinz requested that there be a phase in period instead of a cut-off date for using the new forms. There will be some LEAs who will not use the electronic format.

C. Permit Application (Discussion Results from the RTs):

There was much discussion from various members requesting clarification on the tonnage numbers in the permit application and the tonnage numbers required in the permit. Page 2, section B. of the permit application requests “daily tonnage” and page 3 of the application instructions under B-Facility Information refers to “peak daily tonnage” and states: “This will be referred to as the 'permitted maximum tonnage' and is considered the facility maximum tonnage limit.”

Which number does the LEA put in the permit according to the regulatory authority of the permit application? If CEQA addresses tonnage for disposal only and non-waste recyclable amounts are required to be included in the permitted tonnage then it will erroneously look like there is a need for a permit revision to allow for more materials coming in the gate.

EAC Members suggest clarifying “permitted maximum tonnage” and/or revise the application instructions to be consistent with the permit application. There may be cases in which the “Other” amount of material as defined in Section 3(B)(1)(a)(2), must be identified as incoming material, in excess of the already permitted max tonnage allowed in the existing permit. The extra amount of material that must be recorded may trigger a revised permit if all “other” material and existing “Disposal or Transfer” must equal the peak daily tonnage to be included in the maximum allowed in the SWFP. This may cause a predicament for the LEA because the tonnages received at a facility may not have changed, but the allocation of what tonnages must be identified in the permit application, thus the permit, would dictate a revised permit which must address peak tonnages. There was discussion on the relationship of the permit application to the permit and whether the amounts must be consistent between the permit application and the permit. Mark deBie mentioned the "Other material" indicated in the permit application refers to the solid waste material that is either recycled and removed from the site or is beneficially reused on site. Mark indicated this is not an issue from his perspective as the EA has complete discretion in determining what information to put into the permit. There is no requirement to put any specific types of numbers in the permit.

Howard Levenson asked Bob Holmes if this regulatory changing of the “other” portion of the peak daily tons could be accomplished via a Section 100 regulatory change. Bob did not know at this point, may need to consult legal.

Greg Pirie indicated that the EAC would write something up and bring it back for further discussion.

This discussion led into closure date issues. Are changes in the closure date triggers for a permit revision? Are these dates estimates or an actual prescribed closure date? If the new calculations extend site life, and CEQA analysis was for an earlier closure date, would additional CEQA be needed? Mark said that if there is no physical change, that it is not a project. Some discussion on legal determinations on closure date estimates. There have been times when a closure date change triggered a permit revision. Bernie Vlach said that remaining capacity numbers are estimates. The airspace may remain the same, but factors change and the closure dates get extended. These dates shouldn’t be looked at as a “hard” number.

D. Vehicle Inspections (Survey Results form the RTs):

Most LEAs have some type of vehicle inspection program usually established by local ordinance or under the franchise hauler agreements. This issue was brought up at each of the fall round tables (RT) at the request of a South Central LEA. Robert Weichert said he would follow up with his RT group and see what additional information, if any, is desired.

E. EAC Meeting Format and Agenda Development:

There seems to be too much repetitive information from the RT agendas on each EAC agenda. A review of the current EAC by-laws indicates that the main intent is to discuss major issues and suggest resolution to the issues. EAC discussion included suggestions that the EAC agenda should be less like the round table format. The agenda should identify no more than eight current significant technical issues for discussion. There should be less CIWMB updates because e-mail can update the EAC members on most things. It is up to the EAC Chair to set the agenda.

VII. CIWMB Topics, Updates and Discussion

A. Legislation/Regulations:

Bob Holmes gave the update. No new legislation to report. Current rulemaking packages include:

1. AB 1497 was adopted by the Board. The final rulemaking file is being completed. The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) will have 6 weeks for review. The projected effective date is in February 2007.
2. Active Disposal Site Gas Regulations. These regulations will go back to committee in February. At that time, staff will ask for another 15-day comment period and/or adoption.
3. Temporary Waiver of Terms. The formal rulemaking has not yet started. An All LEA e-mail will be sent out with updates.
4. Financial Assurances. This regulatory package includes cost estimates and addresses closure costs beyond the 30 years. It complies in part with AB 2296. It is in the informal phase. There will be a study in 2007 which may lead to additional rulemaking Comments were taken at the November 27 workshop. EAC contact: Sue Markie

Future packages:

Composting of Mammalian Tissue. This will include emergency regulations that allow for composting on-farm and all compost material must be used on-site. The proposed emergency regulations may possibly go to the February Committee. EAC contact: Robert Wiechert

Gabe is working on regulations to provide additional details on the hearing panel/hearing officer procedures. Gabe will request direction from the Board in February. He’ll be updating the Board on LEA performance results at the same time. EAC contact: Bill Prinz

B. Zoonotic Avian Influenza Disposal Guidance:

Guidance is forthcoming and will be posted on the Board’s website. Bernie Vlach is the CIWMB contact.

C. Hearing Panel Appeals–Ventura County:

Updates were provided on appeals to the hearing panels for the Counties of Monterey, Ventura, Riverside and San Luis Obispo and the City of Los Angeles.

D. Status of 18350 action with City of LA:

A construction and demolition and inert debris (C&D) site had no permit and continued to operate. CIWMB Permitting and Inspection (P&I) staff wrote two 18350 letters and had scheduled a Board meeting agenda item. CIWMB staff received a copy of the cease & desist order issued by the LEA, therefore, the 18350 matter was dropped.

E. Treated Wood Waste:

No new information from CIWMB on handling treated wood waste. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is working on draft regulations which should be available by the end of the year as per statute.

F. Proposed Central Valley Compost Waste Discharge Requirements:

Draft waste discharge requirements (WDRs) appeared excessive, unnecessary and costly to operators. State Water Board agreed to work with CIWMB on alternatives. State Board will draft something “statewide” as opposed to each Regional Board coming up with different compost waste discharge requirements.

G. Guidance for LEAs/Operators on New Regulations for Permit Implementation:

Bobbie Garcia is working on a guidance document that will include a one-stop flow chart that will have the new requirements and include all the steps for deciding if a full, revised or modified permit is required. FAQs will be gathered and responses posted on CIWMB’s website.

H. Mammalian Flesh Composting:

Included in the regulatory update.

I. Compliance Toolbox Development:

Statewide minimum standards training in 2007. Leonard indicated that photos are needed to represent inspection issues–both compliance and non-compliance examples. Send to Leonard.

J. Illegal Dumping Task Force:

Ken Stuart gave an update, including a hand-out and said that his completed report should go to the Board in February. It will also be posted on the CIWMB Illegal Dumping Website.

K. CIWMB Re-Engineering:

Howard gave an update regarding the proposed CIWMB reorganization. Conceptual higher levels of management (2 CEA 3 Program Director positions) have been approved. Implementation will be incremental during 2007.

L. Training Update:

Becky Williams gave an update on the completed Field Sampling training and two scheduled trainings (Load Checking and Planning for Informational Meetings).

Some trainings that are under development are as follows:

• State Minimum Standards Training is under development. P&I and LEA staff will create and present this course.
• Health and Safety (H&S) Refresher Training will once again be offered at five different venues this spring/summer.
• A class on pesticide hazards and possibly drug lab clean-up hazards.

M. Longer Term Postclosure Maintenance Proposed Regulations, Beyond 30 years:

Howard gave an update on extending current financial assurance (FA) mechanisms and contingency factors. This will be a possible committee agenda item in March. More information is included in the regulatory update.

N. Rule 410 Guidance (South Coast Air Quality Management District [SCAQMD] rule on odors at material recovery facilities and transfer stations):

Bob Holmes said that a joint workshop will be held in Diamond Bar on December 20, 2006. Owners/operators have until 1/1/08 to develop an odor management plan (OMP) through the SCAQMD or chose to submit an alternative OMP to the LEA to process.

VIII.  Public Comment Period:

Meeting was adjourned at 2:05 p.m.

EAC Archive

Last updated: April 11, 2008