Enforcement Assistance

Enchiridion

1.  Introduction

1.1 Program Overview
1.2 Goals
1.3 Objectives
1.4 Powers and Duties

1.1 Program Overview

There may be designated within each county, city or special district in the State of California, an enforcement agency (EA) to carry out the closure, enforcement, inspection, and permitting of solid waste facilities and operations.  No EA may exercise the powers and duties of an EA until the designation is approved by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). The CIWMB shall not approve a designation unless it finds that the designated EA is capable of fulfilling its responsibilities and meets certain certification requirements. If an agency is not designated and certified, the CIWMB, in addition to its other powers, shall be the EA within the jurisdiction {Public Resources Code (PRC), Section 43202}. If the CIWMB finds that an EA is not fulfilling its responsibilities, the CIWMB may withdraw its approval of the designation of an EA {PRC 43215, 43216, 43219}. The CIWMB shall become the EA if no new designation is made within 90 days {PRC 43216}.

With the June 1993 CIWMB staff reorganization, the Enforcement Agency Section (EA Section) was created within the Permitting and Enforcement (P&E) Division. The EA Section is charged with the primary responsibility for carrying out the required duties when the CIWMB is serving as the EA.

This enchiridion describes the EA Section's closure, enforcement, inspection and permitting procedures. It is intended to be a dynamic, working document to be updated regularly. Most of the information contained in the enchiridion is not new. Rather, it is a compilation of guidance documents and information produced by and for other sections and branches of the P&E Division.

1.2 Goals

• When acting in the capacity of an EA, to enforce all provisions of PRC, Division 30, and the regulations adopted thereto, for the protection of the environment and the public health and safety, and from nuisance {PRC 43300}.

1.3 Objectives

• Conduct inspections.
• Process permits.
• Perform permit reviews.
• Take appropriate enforcement actions.
• Perform site assessments.
• Oversee corrective actions.
• Review and comment on closure plans, postclosure maintenance plans, and postclosure land uses.
• Consult with other federal, state and local agencies.

1.4 Powers and Duties

• Enforce applicable sections of PRC, Division 30, Part 4, Chapter 2 and the regulations adopted thereunder, and under PRC 43020, pertaining to the minimum standards for solid waste handling and disposal {PRC 43209}.
• Coordinate action in solid waste handling and disposal with other federal, state, and local agencies and private persons {PRC 43301}.
• Request enforcement by appropriate federal, state, and local agencies of their respective laws governing solid waste storage, handling, and disposal {PRC 43302}.
• Develop, implement, and maintain inspection, enforcement, and training programs {PRC 43303}.
• Adopt an enforcement program including a description for carrying out the permit and inspection program pursuant to PRC 44001-44152 {PRC 43304}.
• Keep and maintain records of inspection, enforcement, training, and regulatory programs and any other official action {PRC 43306}.
• Consult with the appropriate local health agency concerning all actions that involve health standards {PRC 43307}.
• Upon compliance with PRC 44007-44009, and after any necessary hearing, issue or revise a Solid Waste Facility Permit (SWFP) if the CIWMB has concurred in the SWFP {PRC 44014(a)}.

2. Closure/Postclosure

2.1 Determination of Applicable Closure Standards
2.2 Closure Plan Review

2.2.1 Post 1988 Sites
2.2.2 Pre-1988 Sites

2.3 Postclosure Maintenance Plan Review
2.4 Postclosure Land Use Proposal Review

2.4.1 CIWMB Requirements
2.4.2 Review Time Frames
2.4.3 Regulatory Agency Coordination

2.5 Site Investigation Process
2.6 Clean Closure
2.7 Nuisance Dumping

Closure and postclosure maintenance is a process. It begins once a disposal site (site) has ceased accepting waste and does not end until the site no longer poses a threat to public health and safety and the environment. A site, or portion of a site, is not considered "closed" until it has ceased accepting waste and has documentation that closure was conducted in accordance with applicable statutes, regulations, and local ordinances in effect at the time. At this point, the site is in the postclosure maintenance phase.

2.1 Determination of Applicable Closure Standards

Briefly, the applicable closure requirements for sites are:

• Last received waste pre-1976: No set requirements at the State level, but may have local closure requirements. A Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) can enforce appropriate portions of the 1984 Chapter 15 regulations if the site poses a threat to water quality;
• Last received waste 1976-1980: Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) minimum standards for 2 feet of final cover (no permeability requirement), grading, and site maintenance apply. Regulations also require the control of leachate and gas. RWQCBs may enforce appropriate portions of the 1984 Chapter 15 regulations should the site pose a threat to water quality;
• Last received waste 1980-October 17, 1984: 14 CCR minimum standards apply as stated above for 1976-1980 sites. Some requirements under 23 CCR may also apply. However, the RWQCBs have latitude on which of these requirements to enforce if the site was closed, inactive, or abandoned as of October 18, 1984 (implementation depends on the threat a site currently poses to water quality);
• Last received waste October 18, 1984-1987 (closure completed by November 18, 1990): Gas control requirements under 14 CCR minimum standards apply as stated above for 1976-1980 sites, as do requirements under 23 CCR; and
• Last received waste post-January 1, 1988: 27 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, apply.

If the applicable closure requirements were not implemented at the time waste acceptance ceased, the site is subject to 27 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 3, Subchapter 5, Article 2 requirements. In general, sites that accepted waste after October 18, 1984, with waste left in place, must have final cover that includes a low permeability layer. Should cover be lacking, it may be possible to determine its requirement based on the threat posed by the site as measured by gas and ground water monitoring wells. EA Section staff will determine requirements on a site-specific basis.

Regardless of the date waste was last received, should the site pose a threat to public health and safety or the environment, then the minimum standards should be applied. In this circumstance, the authority to apply these standards would be the general statutory language in PRC 43214(d)(1) and 45013 and the regulatory language in 14 CCR 18081-18083 and 27 CCR 21100(d).

New postclosure activities that could jeopardize the integrity of previously closed sites, or pose a potential threat to public health and safety or the environment, may invoke the requirements of 27 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 3, Subchapter 5, Article 2.

2.2 Closure Plan Review

PRC 43501 requires solid waste landfill owners/operators to submit a closure and postclosure maintenance plan to the EA, RWQCB, and CIWMB for review and approval. Closure plans may be either preliminary or final depending on the remaining life of the landfill.

Preliminary closure plans are due for new landfills at the time of application for a solid waste facility permit (SWFP) or for existing landfills at the time of application for each SWFP review or revision. Final closure plans are due two years prior to the anticipated date of closure.

The first step in closure plan review is to determine which closure standards apply to a particular site. This determination is described above under "Determination of Applicable Closure Standards". Once the appropriate standards are decided, the next step is to determine whether the site received waste after January 1, 1988. If so, a closure plan that meets the standards of 27 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 4, Subchapter 4 (Subchapter 4), must be submitted. If a site did not receive waste after January 1, 1988, Subchapter 4 does not apply.

2.2.1 Post 1988 Sites

Post 1988 sites are those solid waste landfills that received waste after January 1, 1988. Closure plans submitted for these sites must adhere to the content requirements, as appropriate, contained in Subchapter 4. Subchapter 4 also specifies processing procedures for the review and approval of these plans.

Staff has 30 days to determine if a closure plan is complete. Once the plan is determined to be complete, there are 90 days to approve or disapprove the plan (regulation provides 120 days to review and approve a plan from the date of submittal). In the event the plan is not approved, the operator is required to submit a revised plan within 60 days of disapproval, which ensures compliance with applicable requirements. EA Section staff, in consultation with the Remediation, Closure, and Technical Assistance (RCTA) Branch, will follow the regulations contained in Subchapter 4 in the review and approval of post 1988 closure plans.

By Resolution No. 93-133, the CIWMB delegated authority for the approval of closure and postclosure maintenance plans, including financial assurance mechanisms and postclosure land use proposals, to the Executive Director. By memorandum dated March 16, 1994, the Executive Director delegated authority for the approval of closure and postclosure maintenance plans, including financial assurance mechanisms and postclosure land use proposals, to the Deputy Director of the P&E Division. Preliminary Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plans will be approved by the RCTA Branch Manager, while final plans will be approved by the Deputy Director (see Section 11.4, Delegation of Authority).

2.2.2  Pre-1988 Sites

Pre 1988 sites are those solid waste landfills that did not receive waste after January 1, 1988. Closure plans submitted for these sites do not have to follow the criteria contained in Subchapter 4; however, owners/operators should use Subchapter 4 as guidance to determine what information should be included in a closure plan. The closure plan needs to contain sufficient information to determine compliance with applicable closure regulations.

These closure plans are processed similar to post 1988 closure plans except that the time schedules are not rigid (i.e., not contained in regulations) and that either the EA or RWQCB could serve the clearinghouse function.

2.3 Postclosure Maintenance Plan Review

Postclosure maintenance plans are submitted at the same time closure plans are submitted and are processed simultaneously. The only exception is for sites that have completed closure. In those instances, only the postclosure maintenance plan would be submitted.

Postclosure maintenance plans must be amended, updated, and/or revised as necessary. The requirements for postclosure maintenance plans are contained in Subchapter 4. The same requirements for pre and post 1988 sites as under closure plans apply to postclosure maintenance plans.

2.4 Postclosure Land Use Proposal Review

The goal of the postclosure land use review procedure is to ensure that all solid waste disposal sites comply with applicable closure and postclosure land use regulations contained in 27 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 3, Subchapter 5, Article 2 (Article 2) and will not pose a threat to public health and safety and the environment.

The three primary components of the postclosure land use proposal evaluation procedure are:

1. CIWMB requirements;
2. Review time frames; and
3. Regulatory agency coordination.

2.4.1 CIWMB Requirements

Article 2 sets forth performance standards and minimum substantive requirements for the proper closure, postclosure maintenance, and ultimate reuse of disposal sites. The scope and applicability of the article includes new postclosure activities that may jeopardize the integrity of previously closed sites or pose a threat to public health and safety and the environment.

Postclosure land use proposals must be submitted for review and approval by the EA as required by 27 CCR 21190. This section also lists numerous limitations for construction on top of landfills.

In order to expedite a review, all concerns should be addressed within one complete, clear, and concise proposal. A comprehensive report should address all sections of Article 2 and include any proposal to modify or replace the final cover for any purpose (such as exploratory borings, ground water monitoring, soil testing, or test piles). When considering any preliminary tests, remember that any proposed modification or replacement of the final cover must also be submitted for consideration and approval..

Proposals must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the approving agencies that the activities will not increase the potential threat to public health and safety and the environment. The EA Section will review those comments to determine if any conflict exists among approving agencies. An itemized list of deficiencies will be sent to the applicant. If the proposal is deemed adequate, the proposal will be approved. EA Section staff will work with RCTA staff to ensure that the proposal meets the CIWMB's requirements. Changes in postclosure land use, which require replacement of the barrier layer of the final cover, will be forwarded to the Deputy Director for approval. All other changes in postclosure land use will be forwarded to the Branch Manager for approval.

2.4.22 Review Time Frames

The time frames for review of postclosure land use proposals will be consistent with the Development Permit Act. Pursuant to Government Code (GC), Section 65943, a public agency must determine whether the application is complete or incomplete and notify the applicant within 30 calendar days after receipt of the application. Failure to do so results in the application being deemed complete. When any of the approving agencies determine an application is incomplete, the agency notification to the applicant must include a list of specific information needed to make the application complete. Upon receipt of any resubmittal of the application, a new 30-day period will begin during which the public agencies will determine the completeness of the application.

Pursuant to GC 65943, any public agency which is the lead agency for a development project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) is prepared shall approve or disapprove the project within one year from the date on which an application requesting approval of the project has been received and accepted as complete by that agency. If a negative declaration is adopted, or if the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), then the development project shall be approved or disapproved within six months from the date on which an application requesting approval of the project has been received and accepted as being complete by the agency, unless the proponent requests an extension of the time limit. In most instances, the lead agency is the county planning department and not the CIWMB. The CIWMB is typically a responsible agency..

Pursuant to GC 65952, the CIWMB (a responsible agency) is required to approve a development project that has been approved by the lead agency within whichever of the following is longer: 180 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project or 180 days from the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by the EA Section.

There are many factors that influence time frames for review of postclosure land use proposals. For example, on the developer's side, there are construction schedules, financing deadlines, and the construction season (the weather). On the regulatory agency side, there is the complexity of the proposed project and the availability of staff resources. Because of these factors, the time frames for the review of the postclosure land use may be negotiated between the project proponents and the appropriate regulatory agencies.

2.4.33 Regulatory Agency Coordination

There are several regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over a specific aspect of postclosure land use. Beside the EA and CIWMB, there are local government agencies (i.e., the local air pollution control agencies, public works departments, and planning departments), the RWQCBs, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) (when hazardous wastes are present at the disposal site).

To ensure that all concerns are addressed and to expedite the review process, EA Section staff would request that all appropriate regulatory agencies meet to discuss the requirements of their respective agencies and to assign a lead agency to coordinate comments back to the project proponents. These meetings should be convened as early as possible in the review process to avoid duplication of effort and prevent oversight in meeting the regulations of the respective agencies..

2.5 Site Investigation Process

When investigating and characterizing closed, illegal, and abandoned (CIA) disposal sites, EA Section staff will utilize the forms and guidelines provided in the CIWMB's Site Investigation Process.

2.6 Clean Closure

If an owner/operator plans to close a site by removing the waste, the owner/operator shall submit a Clean Closure Plan in accordance with 27 CCR 21810. In addition, EA Section staff will follow the guidance contained in LEA Advisory No. 166, issued September 26, 1994, when overseeing clean closure activities.

2.7 Nuisance Dumping

EA Section staff follow the guidance contained in LEA Advisory No. 17, issued September 26, 1994, when taking action against nuisance dumping. In most cases, local ordinances will be the most applicable legal mechanism for taking an action. Since the EA Section does not have authority to enforce local ordinances, the action taken is usually a referral to a local authorized agency (e.g., code enforcement or public works). In the event the local agency feels the dumping would be better handled under the CIWMB's regulations, the EA Section will complete a site assessment/investigation and pursue any enforcement action against the owner/operator, within its authority, to cleanup and abate the nuisance.

Last updated: April 18, 2008