GreenYes Archives
[GreenYes Home] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

[GreenYes] URGENT: Please comment on Proposed CA Regs. on Putrescible Wastes, Transfer/Processing
Apologies for Cross-Postings

Please consider sending a letter such as the attached to the CIWMB ASAP 
regarding the upcoming Proposed Regulations on Putrescible Wastes, 
Transfer/Processing that will be heard next week (again).
Thanks!
Gary Liss
***************************************************************************
Linda Moulton-Patterson, Chair
California Integrated Waste Management Board
Cal/EPA Building
P.O. Box 4025
Sacramento, CA 95812-4025
Re: Proposed Regulations on Putrescible Wastes, Transfer/Processing 
affecting Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Division 7, Chapter 3, 
Article 6.0
Dear Madam Chair,
The ________________________________________(list your agency name, and 
describe who's included if regional agency) would like to comment on the 
Proposed Regulations on Putrescible Wastes for Transfer and Processing.
We believe that the proposed changes to the Transfer/Processing Operations 
and Facilities regulatory code sections will create unnecessary regulatory 
barriers that will hinder or prevent the development of programs and 
facilities necessary for us to reach the 50% diversion rate, counter to the 
mission of the CIWMB.
Specifically, we are extremely concerned with the following changes to the 
regulations:
17400. Authority and Scope. Removing the exemption of the regulatory tier 
requirements of sections 17403 through 17403.9 for operations and 
facilities that receive, store, handle, recover, transfer, or process only 
one type of solid waste such as compost, green material and inert wastes 
will significantly impact small operations that process organics and 
construction and demolition debris. Forcing these facilities into a 
permitting structure that requires redundant and expensive regulatory 
review will certainly drive some out of business and discourage the 
development of the new facilities essential to divert these major 
components of the waste stream. We urge the Board to reconsider these 
proposed changes and retain the historical solid waste facility permit 
exemptions for these facilities.
17402. Definitions. (21) "Putrescible wastes." Adding grass clippings to 
the definition of putrescible wastes and limiting the amount of putrescible 
wastes to one percent as the maximum for acceptable residue levels will 
redefine many local recycling businesses that handle source-separated 
materials into solid waste facilities. These changes create unnecessary 
regulatory and financial burdens on facilities that already struggle to 
exist due to other significant economic factors. In fact, these changes 
will likely result in the closure of many facilities that provide waste 
diversion and resource conservation services in our communities. We 
respectfully request that the limit for residue at recycling facilities be 
maintained at 10% and that "chipping and grinding," "composting" and 
"putrescible wastes" be removed from the definition of "Residual." We 
strongly urge the Board to keep "Residual" as it was originally defined, 
limited to non-recyclable waste materials that go to landfill for disposal.
17402.5. Definitions and Related Provisions Regarding Activities That Are 
Not Subject to the Transfer/Processing Regulatory Requirements. Currently, 
local businesses obtain local use permits to handle and recycle the 
materials governed by these regulations. Through this permitting process, 
as well as the general nuisance control authority of the Local Enforcement 
Agency, local agencies have the ability to investigate any complaints and 
direct a business to implement corrective measures to remedy the complaint. 
Broadening the umbrella of materials defined as residue to include compost 
and compost feedstocks, as well as setting a maximum of 1% putrescible 
wastes, will be a significant deterrent to the development of future 
operations that would assist us in meeting its 50% diversion mandate. In 
fact, adding more materials to the definition of residue will likely force 
existing operations to close due to the increased burden in meeting these 
unnecessary regulatory requirements.
Sincerely yours,
Signature & Title
cc: Dan Eaton
Steven R. Jones
Jose Medina
Michael Paparian
David A. Roberti

Gary Liss
916-652-7850
Fax: 916-652-0485





[GreenYes Home] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]