HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-01-03 - AGENDA REPORTS - SOLID WASTE ADVISORY CMTE (2)P 0
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approval
Item to be presente
NEW BUSINESS
DATE: January 3, 1990
John E. Medina
SUBJECT: Request to Clarify the Scope and Duty of the Citizen's Advisory
Committee on Solid Waste Management
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
BACKGROUND
In September 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution 89-126 thereby creating
the 11 -member Citizen's Advisory Committee on Solid Waste Management. This
Committee has met twice with staff and the City Attorney's office to discuss
conflict of interest laws.
\J
At their December 21, 1989 meeting, the Committee unanimously supported the
following motion: Request city staff to place Resolutions 89-126 and 89-138
on the City Council agenda for council review and clarification of the
committee's scope of duty to reduce the likelihood of conflict of interest.
Additionally, the Committee requests that the city's plan for implementing State
Legislation AB 939 be inserted into their charge and the Committee's name be
changed to the Citizen's Advisory Committee on Integrated Solid Waste Management.
Staff, the City Attorney's Office and the Committee members have discussed a
possible revision to the Committee's scope of work. The change is to emphasize
the Committee's role as a panel of experts to advise the Council and deemphasize
the Committee's capacity to influence a specific waste management `
strategy.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt attached Resolution 90-6 Amending Resolution 89-126 and 89-138.
ATTACHMENT
Resolutions 89-126 & 89-138
Proposed Resolution 90-6
Summary of AB 939
Agenda Item: I/ -
A
RESOLUTION NO. 89-126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CREATING A CITIZEN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE- CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City Council of Santa Clarita finds that
the current refuse crisis faced by cities of Los Angeles County
impacts the development of a high quality of life for the
community, and causes it to be of significant concern to the
Citizens of City of Santa Clarita ("City"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best
interests of the City to see to it that the City Council create
a broad foundation of citizen participation and is as fully
informed as possible before establishing a Solid Waste
Management Plan for the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of formally
receiving the opinions of both the residential, commercial and
industrial communities within the City and the opinions of
experts in the field of solid waste before establishing the
City's Solid Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is necessary
to formalize a mechanism to insure that the suggestions and
ideas of the citizenry of the City of Santa Clarita are
formally incorporated into the process of establishing the
General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita, California, DOES RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. Committee Structure. The Santa Clarita
Citizen Committee on Solid Waste Management (the "Committee" is
hereby established as an advisory committee to the City Council
and shall consist of eleven (11) members. Each member shall be
a citizen of the City of Santa Clarita or resident of the Santa
Clarita Valley and over the age of -eighteen (18). The term of
the Committee shall be no more than one -111 year or until the
City Council determines otherwise. The CdAmittee shall be self
governing and shall conduct its meetings in accordance with
rules which may be adopted by the Committee. At the end of the
first meeting, the Committee members shall select from among
their ranks a Chairperson whose name shall be made known to the
public and who shall have the power to address the City Council
on behalf on the Committee.
SECTION 2. Committee Appointments. The City Council
- shall appoint eleven (11) members from the reduced applicant
pool and such additional nominees- as the City Council may
suggest (fifteen (15) applications screened for the City
Council by the City staff) to the Committee. The City Council
shall select the eleven, (-11) members, -by---,any non-discriminatory
or legal selection process- which in~ the' Council's discretion,
best insures a diversity of opinions on the Committee.
Interest representation factors to be considered in making
appointments to the Committee may include:
1. Residential Community,
2. Business community,
3. Environmental experience,
4. Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts,
5. Landfill operators,
6. Refuse collection haulers,
7. Recyclers,
8. Young and elderly age groups,
9. Male and female persons; and
10. Minority and handicapped persons.
Although many members may represent special interest
groups, it is essential that each member approach and discharge
his or her duties in an objective manner to assure that the
overall goals of the community are achieved.
SECTION 3. Selection of the Reduced Applicant Pool.
The City staff shall advertise for up to three (3) days in a
newspaper of general circulation within the City the
availability of appointed membership positions on, the
Committee. The deadline for the submission of applications by
the citizenry for positions on the Committee shall be at least
ten (10) working days from the last date of the aforementioned
publication. At the conclusion of the period designated for
applying for an appointment to the Committee, City staff shall
select fifteen (15) qualified applicants from among the pool of
applicants who have submitted completed applications, using any
non-discriminatory or legal selection process devised by the
City Manager or his agents for this purpose. However, in order
to insure that the suggestions and ideas of private individuals
are brought to the Council's attention, no fewer than one third
of the applicants selected by.the.City staff shall be comprised
of private individuals unless ,the cumulative number of private
individuals who apply for membership on the Committee is fewer
than ten.'-
SECTION
en.'SECTION 4. Contents of Application No application
shall be considered complete at the time of the deadline for
submitting applications, unless it is accompanied by at least
[ three (3) independent letters of recommendation submitted in
( support of the applicant. Such letters of recommendation must
be submitted by citizens of the City of Santa Clarita and must
contain affirmative representations that the authors of the
letters recommend the applicant's appointment on the Citizen
Committee on Solid Waste Management. Applicants are allowed to
have more than three (3) letters of recommendation submitted.
However, any number of letters of recommendation submitted in
excess of three (3) shall entitle the applicant to absolutely
no special consideration whatsoever.
SECTION 5. Duties. The duty of each member of the
Committee shall be to participate in the meetings of the
Committee as noticed by the Committee Chairperson. It shall be
the duty of each member of the Committee (including the
Chairperson) to cast his or her vote whenever entitled to
pursuant to the Committee procedures adopted by the Committee.
SECTION 6. Scope of Work. The Citizen Committee on
Solid Waste Management will focus on specific and immediate
needs for the Santa Clarita Valley. It will undertake the
following scope of work:
1. Develop and recommend guidelines for a City
resolution announcing the City's commitment to a comprehensive
solid waste management program for the Santa Clarita Valley.
2. Review and comment on proposals for landfill sites
in the Santa Clarita Valley.
3. Develop and recommend to Council a waste reduction
strategy with clear and achievable goals. As part of the
strategy, the Committee will study and consider various solid
waste management options:
a. Increasing a greater market for the purchase
and use of products made from recycled
(secondary) materials.
b. Pursuing packaging legislation.
c. Addressing a public education plan to
cultivate a recycling ethic in Santa Clarita.
d. Development of a household toxic waste
disposal plan for the City of Santa Clarita.
e. Analysis of waste composition for commercial
district.
f. Development of recycling program for
commercial district.
g. Development of a yard waste compositing
program.
h. Rail haul. tT,_
4. The Committee will incorporate plans already
underway for the City's consideration of refuse collection with
existing refuse haulers in a recycling program. The Public
t Works Director will provide progress reports to the Committee.
L
• 5. The Committee will also develop and draft a
report for General Plan element on Solid Waste Management for
review by the General Plan Advisory Committee. ,,
SECTION 7. Committee Reports. The Committee shall
issue a written report signed by ?the-, Chairperson which shall
include comments and recommendations., -...The-.-, Committee .is
expected to provide City Council with -an interim report on
January 31,,1990.and a final report on June 1, 1990. A copy of
the report shall be delivered to the City Clerk on or before
the day the report is due.
SECTION 8. Removal of Member. Any resident of the
City of Santa Clarita may petition the City Council to remove a
member of the Committee for his or her unexcused failure to
cast a vote in less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the
votes taken during any one year in which the member was
entitled to cast a vote. For purposes of this Section a valid
abstention or legally necessary disqualification shall excuse
the necessity for a vote.
SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption
of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day
of September , 1989
ATTEST:
GE - A. G'ARA
CITY CLERK
L
JANICE HEIDT
MAYOR
u
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita,
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 26th day
of September 1989, by the following vote of the
Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS: Boyer, Darcy, Koontz, Heidt
COUNCILMEMBERS None
COUNCILMEMBERS McKeon
2
RESOLUTION NO. 89-138
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
RESOLUTION 89-126 CREATING THE
CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council on September 26, 1989 adopted
Resolution 89-126 creating the Citizen Advisory Committee on Solid
Waste Management; and
WHEREAS, it has been recognized as desirable to make certain
changes in the initial organization and specification of duties of
the committee; and
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita,
California does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Section 1 of Resolution No. 89-126 is amended by
deleting the last sentence thereof.
Section 2. Section 2 of Resolution No. 89-126 is amended by
adding at the end of said section the following:
"The City Council shall appoint the Chairperson and the Vice
Chairperson of the Committee."
Section 3. Section 7 of Resolution No. 89-126 is amended to
read as follows:
"Section 7. Committee Reports. The Committee shall issue a
written report signed by the chairperson which shall include
comments and recommendations. The Committee is expected to provide
City Council with a progress report on January 31, 1990, and an
interem report on June 1, 1990. A copy of the report shall be
delivered to the City Clerk on or before the date the report is due.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of
this resolution.
—_—___ y�'—�-��Sl''�' a...+�.,�.::::3G �t�c.+.c_�•ai�aa-C-•S _-.--_..J::_....o.nl'LAS'..«F.'••L:w:r�•�.`:L"-1i6:i�Y.e`e'a'_ _•`�iLiial<<v"If--'`�-`=�'=,`-�betyN
ti
•
0
Passed, approved, and adopted this 30th day of October
1989.
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution -was duly
adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a
regular meeting thereof, held on the 30t day of ort-ohmr ,
1989, by the following vote of the Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS Boyer, Darcy, Koontz, McKeon, Heidt
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS None !, '
CITY
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING RESOLUTIONS 89-126 AND 89-138
CREATING THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ON -SG14D'IWASTE MANAGEMENT.
-7 7
Whereas, the City Council on SepLembev 26, 1989
adopted Resolution 89-126 creating the Citizen Advisory
Comm 1ttee
mWaste, -MArjageinent,-."sand ,,,,,
Whereas, the City Council on October 30, 1989
amended Resolution 89-126 by Resolution 89-138 to make
certain changes in the initial organization and
specification of duties of the Committee; and
Whereas, it is now desirable to make certain
changes in the name of the Committee and scope of work.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of
Santa Clarita, California, does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. The Citizen Advisory Committee on
Waste Management is herebi eFnamed the Citizen Advisory
tee on integrated -S. '4Waste Management ("the
�F
Committee w
Committee"), and all references to the Comm.'LLLee in this
Resolution and Resolutions 89-126 and 89-138 mean the
Citizen Advisory Committee on Integrated Solid Waste
mAnagAment.
SECTION 2. Section 6 of Resolution No. 89-126 is
amended to read as follows:
Section 6. Scope of Work. in an effort to assist
the City in compliance with the California Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989, Chapter 1095 of the 1989 statutes,
the Citizen Advisory Committee on Integrated-Sali Waste
Management will study and report on various options for the
City relating to specific and immediate needs for the Santa
Clarita valley. It will undertake the following work;
1. Study and develop guidelines for integrated
solid waste management programs for the Santa Clarita
valley.
2. Review and comment on proposals for land fill
sites in the Santa Clarita Valley.
TBM:ir/RES90287
12i27i89 12.13 TP213 236 2700 BW&S LA Z004
• •
3. Study and develop integrated s -al" waste
reduction strategies with clear and achievable goals. As a
part of developing such strategies, the Committee will study
and consider various integrated -d waste management
options including:
(a) Increasing d greater market for the
purchase and use of products made from
recycled (secondary) materials.
(b) Pursuing packaging legislation.
(c) Addressing a public education plan to
cultivate a recycling ethic: in Santa
Clarita.
(d) Development of household toxic waste
disposal plans for the City of Santa
Clarita.
(e) Analysis of waste composition for
commercial districts.
(f) Development of recycling programs for
commercial districts.
(g) Development of a yard waste compositing
program.
(h) Rail haul.
4. Study and comment on plans already underway
for refuse collection with existing refuse haulers in a
recycling program. The Public Works Director will provide
progress reports to the Committee.
5. Study and develop a report for a general plan
element on integrated solid waste management for review by
the General Plan Advisory Committee.
-2_
TBM:ir/RE990287
12/27/89 12.13 V213 236 2700
•
BW&S LA
•
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the
--adoption of this -Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
� 19
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
duly adopted by the City Council of the City of
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
, 19 by the following vote of the
Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
CITY CLERK
-3-
TBM:ir/RES90287
2 005
•
RESOLUTION NO. 90-6
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
RESOLUTIONS 89-126 AND 89-138, CREATING
THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
WHEREAS, the City Council on September 26, 1989 adopted
Resolution 89-126 creating the Citizen Advisory Committee on
Integrated Waste Management; and
WHEREAS, the City Council on October 30, 1989 amended
Resolution 89-126 by Resolution 89-138 to make certain changes in
the initial organization and specification of duties of the
Committee; and
WHEREAS, it is now desirable to make certain changes in the
name of the Committee and scope of work.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita, California, does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Citizen Advisory Committee on Solid Waste
Management is hereby renamed the Citizen
Advisory Committee on Integrated Waste
Management ("the Committee"j, and all references
to the Committee in this Resolution and
Resolutions 89-126 and 89-138 mean the Citizen
Advisory Committee on Integrated Waste
Management.
SECTION 2: Section 6 of Resolution No. 89-126 is amended to
read as follows:
SECTION 6: Scope of Work. In an effort to assist the City
in compliance with the California integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989, Chapter 1095 of
the 1989 statutes, the Citizen Advisory
Committee on Integrated Waste Management will
study and report on various options for the City
relating to specific and immediate needs for the
Santa Clarita Valley. It will undertake the
following work:
0 •
1. Study and develop guidelines for integrated
solid waste management programs for the Santa
Clarita Valley.
2. Review and comment on proposals for land fill
sites in the Santa Clarita Valley.
3. Study and develop integrated waste reduction
strategies with clear and achievable goals. As
a part of developing such strategies, the
Committee will study and consider various
integrated waste management options including:
(a) Increasing a greater market for the
purchase and use of products made from
recycled (secondary) materials.
(b) Pursuing packaging legislation.
(c) Addressing a public education plan to
cultivate a recycling ethic in Santa
Clarita.
(d) Development of household toxic waste
disposal plans for the City of Santa
Clarita.
(e) Analysis of waste composition for
commercial districts.
(f) Development of recycling programs for
commercial districts.
(g) Development of a yard waste compositing
program.
(h) Rail haul.
4. Study and comment on plans already underway for
refuse collection with existing refuse haulers
in a recycling program. The Public works
Director will provide progress reports to the
committee.
;T ®� M 1
00
2NIO
D■®®
O■®®
California Cities
Work Together
•
•
League of California Cities
1400 K STREET • SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 • (916) 444-5790
A GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING AB 939
"THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1989"
November 1989
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
e1:WWN\N
This legislative session the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 939, the
"California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989." AB 939 enacts a comprehensive
reorganization of the state's solid waste management planning process, changing the focus
from "solid waste management" to "integrated waste management."
AB 939 includes four major parts. The first reorganizes the California Waste Management
Board; the second creates a new, integrated waste management planning process, including
recycling goals for cities and counties; the third strengthens the certification criteria and
performance standards for Local Enforcement Agencies; the fourth simply reorganizes and
consolidates existing law (AB 2448 - Eastin), with minor modifications, into different code
sections in the Public Resources Code.
Waste Board Reorganization
AB 939 creates the California Integrated Waste Management Board, a, six member, full-
time Board, which replaces the current nine member, part-time California Waste
Management Board. The new Board's membership consists of one representative from
the private sector with experience in the solid waste industry, one representative from a
non-profit environmental organization whose purpose is to promote recycling and protection
of air and water quality, and four public members with no specified expertise. AB 939
establishes strict conflict of interest provisions for Board members and prohibits
nonreported ex -parte communication.
Integrated Waste Management Planning
AB 939 creates the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (COIWMP), which
replaces the County Solid Waste Management Plan (COSWMP).
Each city in the county, and the county for the unincorporated area, must prepare, adopt,
and implement a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, which identifies how the
jurisdiction will divert through source reduction, recycling, and composting 25% of solid
waste from landfill or incinerator by 1995, and 50% or the maximum amount feasible by
2000. 10% of the 50% goal may be achieved by incineration, at the discretion of the local
government, provided that certain environmental conditions are met. These Source
Reduction and Recycling Elements become part of the COIWMP. The COIWMP also
includes a Countywide Siting Element, which is similar to the traditional COSWMP. The
•
. d,
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan, except for the individual Source Reduction
and Recycling Elements, is approved by the county, and the majority of the cities with the
majority of the population in the incorporated area. The Source Reduction and Recycling
Elements are reviewed and approved or disapproved by the Integrated Waste Management
Board, at the same time the Board reviews the COIWMP, unless the city wishes to submit
its Element earlier.
The Board may grant a reduction or exemption from the recycling goals for small cities
and may grant a one year time extension to jurisdictions not meeting the recycling goals
due to unforeseen adverse market conditions for recycled materials. The Board may
impose administrative civil penalties on the city or county of up to $10,000 per day for
failure to develop an adequate Element or Plan.
The Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans are to be submitted to the Board
based upon the amount of landfill capacity remaining in the county, as shown below:
Date Due # Years Capacity Remaining
January 1, 1992 less than 5 years
January 1, 1993 5 to 8 years
January 1, 1994 more than 8 years
City Source Reduction and Recycling Elements are due to the county by July 1; 1991.
AB 939 authorizes cities and counties to charge fees to cover the cost of preparing,
adopting, and implementing the Elements and Plans. It also authorizes the Waste Board
to require landfill operators to charge a tipping fee schedule culminating in up to $1.00 per
ton by July 1, 1991.
Finally, AB 939 also requires cities and counties to implement a household hazardous
waste collection program.
Local Enforcement Agencies
AB 939 strengthens the certification and performance standards for Local Enforcement
Agencies (LEAs). It creates four categories under which an LEA may be certified: (1)
permitting, inspection, and enforcement at solid waste landfills; (2) incineration; (3) transfer
and processing stations; and (4) inspection and enforcement of litter, odor, and nuisance
regulations at landfills. An LEA may be designated by a city, a county or through a JPA
between a county and cities. The Board must approve the LEA designation. AB 939 also
specifies that no local government department or agency which is the operating unit for a
solid waste facility may be the LEA for the types of solid waste handling or disposal it
conducts.
2
Follow-up Activity
Due to the way AB 939 was amended in the last days of the legislative session, it includes
many technical problems that require attention, such as conflicting dates, confusion over
issues that were supposed to have been resolved, and drafting errors. These will be
addressed in a technical clean-up bill early in 1990. Also, there are several policy issues
with which the League continues to take exception and which we will attempt to address
the 1990 legislative session. Finally, the League will monitor and be an active participant
in the State's regulatory process to implement AB 939, which will start in late 1989 and
continue into 1990.
I. INTRODUCTION
In 1989, the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed AB 939 (Sher) (Chapter
1095, Statutes of 1989), the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
It includes a reorganization of California's waste management planning process, a
new full time Waste Management Board, and a strengthening of Local Enforcement
Agencies. The enactment of AB 939, along with a number of other bills designed
to stimulate the development of markets for recycled materials, culminates several
years of legislative activity in the solid waste field. While the League was an active
participant throughout the legislative process, several key issues of importance to
the League were decided in the final days of the legislative session by the
administration and legislative leadership. This last minute amendment process
allowed for no opportunity for review and changes by outside groups; thus while the
League is and has been supportive of legislation requiring recycling, there are a
number of serious technical and policy issues in AB 939 with which the League
disagrees, and which we will attempt to address in the 1990 legislative session.
The purpose of this Guide is to provide a brief explanation of the key elements of
AB 939, answer commonly asked questions, and identify issues and technical
problems that may be addressed in legislation next year. The League will continue
to provide updates on AB 939 implementation as needed, and will monitor and
participate in the regulatory development process.
II. OVERVIEW'
There are four major parts to AB 939. The first part reorganizes the California
Waste Management Board. The second part reorganizes the current COSWMP to
a process designed to develop a Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan,
including city and county recycling plans. The third part strengthens the Local
' Information in parentheses and italics refers to specific sections of the bill, for
those readers who wish more detailed information. -
3
Enforcement Agency structure. The fourth makes minor changes to, and
consolidates existing law, primarily AB 2448 (Eastin-Chapter 1319, Statutes of
1987) with other solid waste codes in the Public Resources Code. This Guide
provides a summary of the key elements of the first three parts.
III. WASTE BOARD REORGANIZATION (Part I, Chapter 3)
AB 939 reorganizes the current California Waste Management Board from a 9
member, part-time Board, to a 6 member, full-time Board, called the California
Integrated Waste Management Board. The Board consists of the following:
-- One member who has private sector experience in the solid waste industry;
-- One member who has served as an elected or appointed official for a non-
profit environmental protection organization whose principle purpose is to
promote recycling and air/water quality;
-- Four members, with no specified expertise or experience, who represent the
public.
The bill includes strict conflict of interest provisions, as well as a prohibition on
unreported ex -parte communication. If a former elected local government official
is appointed to the Board as a public member, he or she is exempt from the
provision that prohibits any person from serving on the Board if that person
received more than 10% of his or her income the two years before appointment
from a person or entity subject to regulation by the Board. The waste industry
member also is exempt from the 10% income limitation.
IV. COUNTYWIDE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS. CITY AND
COUNTY SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENTS (Part II)
One of the major impacts of AB 939 is the changes it makes in solid waste
management planning at the city and county level. While it repeals County Solid
Waste Management Plans (COSWMPs) and instead requires preparation of a
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (COIWMP), many of the existing
features and procedures of the traditional COSWMP remain intact. This section
includes a summary of the key provisions involved. The reader is referred to Part
H, Chapters 1-9 of AB 939 for a more detailed description of the process.
A. Local Planning Committees
On or before March 1, 1990, and every five years thereafter, each county
shall convene a countywide task force to assist in the developmeof a
Countywide Integrated Waste Management P individual city and unty
Source Reduction Recycling Elements and t�ountywide Siting Element
(Each of these items will be described in more detail in later sections of
the Guide). The goal of the task force is to ensure a coordinated and cost -
4
effective regional integrated waste management program. The task force
shall undertake the following tasks:
1) Identify solid waste management issues of countywide or regional
concern.
2) Determine the need for countywide solid waste collection systems,
processing facilities and marketing strategies that can serve more
than one local jurisdiction.
3) Facilitate the development of m`ult_u�ctional.__ angement for
the marketing of req cling materials.
4) To the extent possible, facilitate resolution of conflicts and
inconsistencies among or between city Source Reduction and
Recycling Elements.
This task force also guides the development of the Siting Element of the
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.
B. Count wide Integrated Waste Management Plan (Chapter 5)
Each county shall prepare and submit to the California Integrated Waste
Management Board a Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan,
which -consists.-of-all of the following:
1) , All the city Source Reduction and Recycling Elements;
2) The county's Source Reduction and Recycling Element prepared
- for the unincorporated areas of the county;
3) The Countywide Siting Element;
The plan shall also include a statement of the goals and objectives set forth
by the countywide task force.
The Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan and any amendments
to it, except for the individual city and county Source Reduction and
Recycling Elements, shall be approved by the county and by a majority of
the cities within the county which contain a majority of the population of
the incorporated areas in the county, except in those counties which have
only two cities, in which case the Plan is subject to the approval of the city
contains the majority of the population of the unincorporated areas of the
county. If a city fails to act upon the Plan or the proposed amendments
within 90 days after receiving the Plan or the amendment, the city or county
shall be deemed to have approved the Plan or the amendment as submitted
5
C.
(It is important to note that this approval process is identical to the
approval process for the COSWMP.)
Each Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan and the Elements
of it shall be revised, and, if necessary, submitted to the Board every 5
years. (COSWMP revision was every 3 years.)
The Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans are to be submitted
by counties to the Board for review and approval based upon the following
schedule (Chapter 6, Article 2):
Date Due # Years Capacity Remaining
January 1, 1992 less than 5 years
January 1, 1993 5 to 8 years
January 1, 1994 more than 8 years
City Source Reduction and Recycling Elements are due to the county by
July 1, 1991.
City Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (Part II, Chapter 2)
On or before July 1, 1991, each city shall prepare, adopt, and submit to the
county in which the city is located a Source Reduction and Recycling
Element. This Element should be designed to place primary emphasis on
implementing all feasible source reduction, recycling, and composting
programs while identifying the amount of landfill and transformation
(incineration) capacity that will be needed for solid waste which cannot be
recycled, reduced or composted. The term "transformation" is used
throughout AB 939; it refers to facilities which undertake incineration,
pyrolysis, distallation, 'gasification, or biological conversioon other than
composting. The local agency will have the sole determination of how to
dispose of wastes that cannot be recycled, reduced, or composted -- that is,
it will be a local decision whether or not landfill or incineration will be the
disposal methodology that will be used.
Each city, and county Source Reduction and Recycling Element shall include
all of the following components for wastes generated within the jurisdiction:
1 a waste characterization component source reduction component; a
recycling component;composting component solid waste facility
capacity component; aWeducation and public information component; a
funding component; a special waste component; and a household hazardous
waste component. The local agency shall determine what mix of source
reduction, recycling, and composting activities it will choose to achieve the
waste diversion goals required by the bill, described below.
C
2
The household hazardous waste component of AB 939 is dictated by the
requirements found in AB 888 (La Follette) (Chapter 809, Statutes of
1988). This bill requires cities and counties to develop household hazardous
waste programs, but directs the Board to develop guidelines that will allow
for the maximum flexibility in individual program development and
implementation. The review and approval process for the household
hazardous waste programs, as specified in AB 888, is different from that of
AB 939, provides for more local flexibility, and is less restrictive than that
of AB 939. An important feature of_ ABUM_is_zelief from liability exposure
hazardous wasteprograms.-
'Me
azarouswasteprograms.-
The Source Reduction and Recycling Elements shall include an
implementation schedule that, for the initial element, will show how the city
will divert 25% of all solid waste from landfill or transformation facilities
by January 1, 1995 through source reduction, recycling, and composting
activities. For the first revision of the element, the city must show how it
will divert 50% or the maximum amount feasible, as determined by the
Board, by January 1, 2000. Nothing in the bill prohibits a city or county
from undertaking activities that are designed to exceed these goals. At the
discretion of the local agency, 10% of the 50% may be from transformation
facilities (i.e., incineration); however, for a community that is not able to
achieve the 50% requirement, the Board may not require the city or county
to use incineration to achieve that goal. (Chapter 6, Article 1)
The Board may provide an exemption or a resiuction_in the goals if a city
demonstrates and the Board concurs that the goal is not feasible due to the
small geographic size of the city and the small quantity of waste generated
within the city or county. The Board may establish alternative, but less
comprehensive requirements for those cities and counties wishing to receive
the reduction or exemption.
The Board may grant a one
year time extension from the requirements of
meeting the recycling goals to any city or county, if the Board finds that
unfavorable, unforeseen, and severely adverse market conditions beyond the
city's or county's control prevented the county or city from meeting the goal.
The City and county must submit a plan of correction that shows how the
agency will meet the requirements and that describes the activities that
will be implemented to undertake the program. (Chapter 7, Article 3)
It should be noted that AB 939 includes detailed criteria through which a
transformation project may be eligible to receive the 10% credit towards
the 50% goal. It is important to note that use of a transformation project
is solely at the discretion of the local -agency. --In--addition, AB -939- also ---- —
authorizes the Board to establish alternative Source Reduction and
Recycling goals for local agencies which currently operate transformation
facilities, provided certain conditions are met.
7
Following the Board's approval of a Source Reduction and Recycling
Element, the city shall submit an annual report to the Board summarizing
progress and implementing the element. In addition, each city or county
shall review its Source Reduction and Recycling Element at least once every
5 years to correct any deficiency and shall submit this revised element to
the Board for review or approval.
A city may enter into a memo of understanding with another city, county,
regional planning agency, agency formed under a JPA or a district
established to manage solid waste in order to prepare and implement the
Source Reduction Recycling Elements or the Countywide Integrated Waste
Management Plan.
Within 120 days of receiving a city or county Source Reduction and
Recycling Element, or the County Integrated Waste Management. Plan, the
r� Board shall review the Element and Plan and either approve or disapprove
them. If the Board disapproves an Element or a Plan, the Board must issue
G- a Notice of Deficiency to the city or county which identifies the specific
eX reasons for the disapproval, and shall make specific recommendations on
how to correct the deficiencies. If the city or county fails to submit an
adequate Plan or Element, the Board may impose administrative civil
penalities of up to $10,000 per day. (Chapter 7, Article 2)
In addition, not less frequently than every 2 years, the Board shall review
each city and county Source Reduction and Recycling Element to determine
whether the city or county is implementing the element. If, after a public
hearing, the Board finds that the city or county has failed to implement its
element, the Board shall issue an order of compliance with a specific
schedule for achieving compliance. If, after the public hearing, and issuing
the order of compliance, the Board still finds that the city or county has
failed to implement its element, the Board may impose administrative civil
penalties of up to $10,000 per day until the city or county implements the
element. (Chapter 7, Article 4)
Finally, AB 939 authorizes cities and counties to impose fees in order to
pay for the costs of preparing, adopting, and implementing the Countywide
/ Integrated Waste Management Plan and the Elements. (Chapter 8)
D. Countywide Siting Elements (Chapter 4)
The Countywide Siting Element is very similar to the traditional COSWMP.
Each county shall prepare a Countywide Siting Element which includes a
description of the areas to be used for development of adequate
transformation or disposal capacity consistent with the development and
implementation of the county and city Source Reduction Recycling
Elements. The disposal capacity requirements in each Countywide Siting
E.'
0, 7,30 9�� rOis
�,h A
Element is generally based upon, the facility capacity components of the
individual city and county Source Reduction and Recycling Elements.
These facility capacity components provide a projection of the amount of
solid waste capacity which will be needed toAce—on-11nodate the solid waste
generated within the city or the county fo a,11-5ye�ar period, taking into
consideration the total amount of solid waste rated, minus the amount
4� of solid waste that is expected to be reduced, recycled, composted, or
transformed.
The Countywide Siting Element and any amendments to it, must be
approved by the county and by a majority of the cities within the county
which contain a majority of the population of the incorporated area except
in those counties which have only two cities, in which case the element is
subject to approval by the city which contains the majority of the population
of the incorporated area in the county. This approval process is identical
to that of the traditional COSWMP.
The Countywide Siting Element shall include a resolution from each
affected city or county stating that any areas identified for location of new
or expanded solid waste transformation or disposal facilities is consistent
with the applicable local agency general plan.
FUNDING
In addition to the local fee authority authorized in AB 939 and described above,
AB 939 includes two new funding and financial programs. First, AB 939 directs the
Board, in consultation with the State Board of Equalization and the appropriate
legislative committees, to complete a report and propose model legislation for the
introduction of legislation for disposal cost fee system on goods sold in California
which are not subject to the bottle bill fees and which are normally disposed of in
solid waste landfills or processed in transformation facilities (Chapter 3, Article 4).
In evaluating any disposal cost fee, the Board shall give highest priority to those
disposable goods which comprise the greatest percentage of materials being
disposed and the greatest potential for environmental degradation, and shall take
into consideration disposable goods which are already effectively recycled, reduced,
or reused. This report is due to the Legislature January 1, 1991 for legislation to
be introduced in the 1991-92 Legislative Session. Disposal cost fees, such as those
added on by the bottle bill, are a means of generating revenue that could be used
to offset the state's solid waste budgetary costs, backfill revenue lost to the state due
to tax credits, or to provide technical assistance to local governments.
Second, AB 939 requires operators of solid waste landfills to increase tipping fees
that will .be deposited in the state's new integrated waste management account.
(Part 7, Chapter 2) The tipping fee initially shall be set at- 50 cents per ton for
waste disposed of during the period January 1, 1990 through June 30, 1990. The
tipping fee for waste disposed of during the period July 1, 1990 through June 30,
1991 shall be set by the Board at an amount sufficient to generate revenues
0
equivalent to the Board's approved budget for the 1990 to 1991 fiscal year, but shall
not exceed 75 cents per ton. The fee for waste disposed of on July 1, 1991 and
thereafter, shall be set annually by the Board at an amount sufficient to generate
revenues equivalent to the approved budget for that fiscal year, but shall not exceed
$1 per ton.
IV. LOCAL ENFORCEMENT'AGENCIES (Part IV, Chapter 2)
AB 939 strengthens the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) process by enhancing
performance standards and certification criteria. On or before August 1, 1991, the
Board shall prepare and adopt new certification regulations for Local Enforcement
Agencies. These regulations shall specify the requirements that a local agency must
meet before being designated as an LEA. The regulations shall include, but are
not limited to, all of the following: technical expertise, adequacy of staff resources,
adequacy of budget resources, training requirements, and the existence of at least
one permitted solid waste facility within the jurisdiction of the local agency.
These regulations shall specify 4 separate types of certifications for which an
enforcement agency may be designated, as described below:
1. Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of regulations at solid waste
landfills;
2. Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of solid waste incinerators;
3. Permitting, inspection, and enforcement of transfer and processing stations;
4. Inspection and enforcement of litter, odor, and nuisance regulations at solid
waste landfills.
After August 1, 1992, no enforcement agency shall be designated unless the Board
determines that the agency fully complies with one of the more certification types
specified above. No existing enforcement agency shall, after August 1, 1992,
exercise its powers as an enforcement agency unless the agency has been certified
by the Board.
The designation of an enforcement agency may be made by 3 procedures.
1. The board of supervisors of a county may designate the enforcement agency
subject to the approval of the majority of the cities with the majority of the
population in the incorporated areas.
2. The county and the cities within the county may enter into a JPA to
establish an enforcement agency.
3. A city council may designate an enforcement agency.
10
If an LEA is not designated and certified within a county, the state Board shall be
the enforcement agency within the county. No local government department or
agency, which is the operating unit for a solid waste handling or disposal operation
shall be the enforcement agency for the types of solid waste handling or disposal
operation it conducts.
Existing Local Enforcement Agencies will continue to operate until the new LEA
is certified, but in no case, shall continue beyond August 1, 1992.
V. A WORD ABOUT TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
Due to the way AB 939 was amended in the closing two days of the 1989
Legislative Session, it includes a number of technical problems that will require
immediate clean-up legislation in 1990. For example, as the reader of AB 939 will
note, several dates are inconsistent, and it appears in several places that language
that should have been deleted, was not, or clarifying language that should have been
included was not. The League will work with other interested organizations, the
Waste Board, and the author to identify these technical areas in need of clean-up.
We anticipate that urgency legislation will be introduced early in 1990 to resolve
these problems. Questions about these technical problems, or other issues, should
be directed to the League's Sacramento office.
In addition, there continue to be policy issues of interest to the League that may
also be addressed in legislation next year.
VI. QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION
As mentioned previously, there remain a number of unresolved issues that will be
addressed in the next legislative session. In addition, there are several questions
that are commonly asked about the bill. This section summarizes these two areas
in an attempt to clarify AB 939 for the reader.
1. It appears there are conflicting dates in AB 939; is this correct?
Yes, there do appear to be conflicting dates in AB 939. For example,
Chapter 2, Article 1 states that on or before July 1, 1991, each city must
submit to the county its Source Reduction and Recycling Element.
However, Chapter 3, Article 1 states that on or before January 1, 1991 each
county shall complete its Source Reduction and Recycling Element.
Obviously, these dates are in conflict. It is unclear at this time what the
correct date should be, although we anticipated it will be July 1, 1991. As
soon as this is resolved, we will alert all cities.
2. When will the Board have guidelines -available-for preparation- of- the
Source Reduction Recycling Elements, Countywide Siting Elements, and
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans?
11
AB 939 states that the new Waste Board shall complete preparations of
guidelines for compliance with the requirements of the bill by January 1,
1990. Although this presents a short timeframe in which to prepare the
regulations, the Board staff has indicated it intends to meet the January
1, 1990 deadline. The League will monitor closely the rig latoryprocess
as it relates to AB 939 and will participate as needed.
3. If my city already has a curbside recycling program, will we "get credit" for
the solid waste already being recycled when calculating our progress in
achieving the 25% goal?
Yes. AB 939 contains language, included specifically at the request of the
League, that, for the purposes of determining the recycling levels, cities and
counties will get credit and shall include all existing residential, commercial,
and industrial source reduction recycling and composting activities that
divert solid waste from landfills and transformation facilities. (Part H,
Chapter 6, Article 1) In order to take full advantage of existing recycling
activities, it is suggested that cities not only evaluate the amount of
residential solid waste that is diverted through curbside recycling,
neighborhood collection centers, or AB 2020 centers, but also recycling that
is going on in the commercial and industrial sectors. For example, many
restaurants may be participating in the glass industry's Phoenix program,
just as many businesses may have programs to recycle waste paper or
cardboard. Similarly, industries that recycle scrap metal, thus returning it
to the economic mainstream., should also be counted.
4. My city is considering starting a recycling program, however, our county's
Integrated Waste Management Plan is not due until 1993 or 1994. Should
we wait to start our recycling program?
No, don't wait. The sooner your city begins activities to recycle or compost
solid waste or other activities that will divert solid waste from landfills, the
better. This is because, as stated above, you will receive credit for recycling
activities already carried out.
5. Who will carry out the inspection, permitting, and enforcement activities
until our new Local Enforcement Agency is certified?
The existing LEA will continue to carry out its activities until the new LEA
is designated and certified, as long as it is certified by August 1, 1992.
The existing LEA will relate to the existing Waste Board as it has in the
past, until the new Board is appointed.
6. What is the status of our existing COSWMP?
This is another issue that will require clarification in the next legislative
session. AB 939 deletes existing law related to COSWMPs and language
12
was supposed to be included to provide for a smooth transition between the
existing COSWMP and the new. COIWMP. At this point, it appears that
a COSWMP that is currently delinquent will no longer be delinquent as of
January 1, 1990, the effective date of AB 939. However, it is unclear
exactly what will happen during the interim between January 1, 1991 and
when the Countywide Plans are due. This is an important issue that was
not clearly addressed in AB 939 and is now subject to different
interpretations. The League is working with the Board and the author's
staff to resolve the issue as soon as possible. We will notify cities as the
issue progresses.
7. What does the phrase 'Integrated Waste Management Hierarchy,' mean?
AB 939 states very simply that in implementing the requirements of the bill,
the California Integrated Waste Management Board and local agencies shall
promote waste management practices in the following order of priority:
source reduction, recycling and composting, and environmentally safe
transformation and environmentally safe land disposal (at the discretion of
the city or county). This means that it is the policy of the state that source
reduction, recycling and composting be given priority and that wastes that
cannot be reduced at the source, recycled, or composted, shall be disposed
of through landfill or transformation facility. It does not mean that a
community must do recycling to the exclusion of siting a new transfer
station or expanding an existing landfill.
8. Is there anything to prevent my city from cooperatively putting together a
Source Reduction and Recycling Element with the county and a neighboring
city?
No. The bill specifically states that a city may join with other cities, a
county or whatever means is appropriate to carry out the provisions of the
bill. Thus, if your city is a member of a solid waste district, the district can
carry out the requirements of the bill for all of the members of the district.
Similarly, if one disposal firm handles the business for a part of the county
and half of the cities in that county, it may be prudent to explore the
feasibility of a cooperative effort with that county and the group of cities.
The task force that must be convened by March 1, 1990 may provide an
opportunity to explore such mutually beneficial cooperative arrangements.
9. What happens after my city transmits its Source Reduction and Recycling
Element to the county?
Your city's Source Reduction and Recycling Element will become an
attachment to the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan that will -
be submitted to the Board for review and approval. The goals and
strategies of your Source Reduction and Recycling Element, as well as those
of the county and other cities within the county, may be summarized in the
13
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. Once your city's Source
Reduction and Recycling Element is approved by your city, it will not be
subject to any additional county approval process. Where feasible, the
countywide task force may attempt to resolve inconsistencies among
individual Elements, but the county has no authority to dictate to an
individual city, just as the city has no authority to dictate to the county, the
contents of an individual Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Each
individual city and county Source Reduction and Recycling Element will be
reviewed by the Board when it reviews the COIWMP, and approved or
disapproved on its own merits.
10. What happens if my city does not reach the 25% goal by 1995?
This is an issue the League will continue to address into the 1990
Legislative Session. AB 939 states that the Waste Board may grant a one
year time extension from the goals to any city or county if a. Board
determines that "unfavorable, unforeseen and severely adverse market
conditions beyond the control of the city or county," prevent the city or
county from meeting the recycling goals. In order to receive the extension,
the city must submit a plan of correction, which demonstrates how the city
or county will meet the goal, including the source reduction, recycling, and
composting steps the city will implement and how it will fund these
programs, and if the city or county demonstrates that it is achieving the
maximum feasible amount of source reduction, recycling, and composting
within its jurisdiction.
The "unfavorable, unforeseen, and severely adverse market conditions"
criteria are more restrictive than language that the League had been
seeking and had been discussed in various meetings. In addition, the
League had strenuously been proposing language to also. allow a time
extension due to "unforeseen economic conditions which create a hardship
in the community." This language was not included in the final version of
AB 939. The League will continue to work in the coming legislative session
to attempt to include more realistic criteria for extensions, and to clarify
that more than one one year time extension may be permitted.
11. My city is already recycling and composting 200/c of solid waste and we
expect to reach 35% by 1995. Is there anything in AB 939 to prevent us
from proceeding? -
No. AB 939 states that nothing prohibits a city or county from
implementing source reduction, recycling, and composting activities designed
to exceed the goals specified in the bill.
12. Can my city submit its Source Reduction and Recycling Element to the
Board for review before the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan
is due?
14
s-
O
11
Yes. Any city may submit its Source Reduction and Recycling Element to
the Board for review before the date that the Countywide Integrated Waste
Management Plan is due.
VII. OTHER INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT LEGISLATION
In addition to AB 939, the Governor also signed a variety of companion bills as part
of the Integrated Waste Management package. The majority of these bills are
designed to stimulate the markets for recycled materials, and include the following
bills:
SB 1322 (Bergeson) (Chapter 1096). Integrated Waste Management and Public
Education
SB 432 (Alquist) (Chapter 1090). Recycling Tax Credits
SB 1221 (Hart) (Chapter 1339). Increase in Bottle Bill Redemption Values
AB 4 (Eastin) (Chapter 1094). State Purchasing of Recycled Materials
AB 888 (La Follette) (Chapter 809). Household Hazardous Waste
AB 1305 (Killea) (Chapter 1093). Newspapers. Recycled Material
AB 1306 (Killea) (Chapter 1092). Solid Waste. Paving Materials
AB 1307 (Killea) (Chapter 285). Recycling. Industrial Development Bonds
AB 1308 (Killea) (Chapter 1091). Recycling. Tax Credits
AB 1507 (Sher) (Chapter 1226). Recycled Oil
AB 1843 (Willie Brown) (Chapter 974). Solid Waste. Tires
Of particular interest to cities are SB 1322, AB 888, and AB 4.
A. SB 1322 (Bergeson). Integrated Waste Management and Public Education,
SB 1332 directs the new Integrated Waste Management Board to implement
a number of specified programs to promote integrated waste management,
including activities to develop markets for recycled material and to provide
technical assistance and public information related to integrated waste
management. Of interest to cities is the requirement for the creation of
a Source Reduction Advisory Committee which will recommend specific
actions to the Board and the Legislature to reduce the volume of solid
waste materials generated in the state, and the creation of the Recycling
15
Market Development Commission which shall make recommendations to
the Governor and the Legislature for the expansion of markets for recycled
materials. The Commission is charged with performing the following tasks:
establishing a liaison with private industries to promote the increased
utilization of recycled feed stock in manufacturing processes, assist local
governments in including recycled activities into county economic
development plans, promote utilization of all available financial resources
for expansion of recycled .industry capacity, review the research and
development programs administered by the Board, and review state, local
and private industry product and materials procurement practices and
recommend improvements as appropriate.
Also of specific interest to local governments are the enforcement agency
training and assistance provisions and waste evaluation provisions in SB
1322. The bill directs the Board to provide periodic training to Local
Enforcement Agencies, as well as ongoing technical assistance and guidance.
In addition, to the extent that resources are available, it also directs the
Board to provide technical assistance to the public and private sector in the
form of government and business waste evaluations upon a request for that
assistance. Finally, SB 1322 directs the Board to provide technical
assistance to cities and counties to assist in the development, revision,
amendment, and implementation of local city Source Reduction and
Recycling Elements and Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans.
The League will monitor the implementation of SB1322 closely, with the
goal of ensuring that the local technical assistance component is carried out
as vigorously as possible.
B. AB 4 (Eastin) State Purchasing of Recycled Materials
While AB 4 focuses primarily on state procurement policies, it does state
that local agencies shall purchase recycled materials, primarily paper
products and recycled oil and recycled paper, fitness and quality being
equal. AB 4 also removes the 5% cap that was in existing law for the
preference that local agencies may give to the purchase of recycled
materials. Based upon the new language in AB 4, all local agencies MU
give a preference to suppliers of recycled paper. However, the amount of
that preference shall be determined by the local agency.
C. AB 888 La Follette), Household Hazardous Waste Programs,
AB 888 requires cities and counties to develop and implementa household
hazardous waste program. Although the bill refers to_ the existing
COSWMP process, clean-up legislation for 1990 will be required to make
the planning process described in AB 888 compatible with the new
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan process, including city and
16
r
AB939.imp
county Source Reduction and Recycling Elements, established in AB 939.
Nevertheless, the household hazardous waste program criteria specified in
AB 888 shall remain.
Each city and county must implement a household hazardous waste plan
as part of their Source Reduction and Recycling Element. The bill
authorizes the Waste Management Board to review and comment on the
household hazardous waste plan and to make recommendations to the local
agencies to improve the program. However, the review process for the
individual household hazardous waste program is different than that
specified in AB 939, in that AB 888 requires the local agency to certify to
the Board that the agency has implemented its plan. The Board shall
prepare in guidelines in consultation with the Department of Health
Services and an advisory committee established by the bill, to guide the
efforts of local agencies in providing household hazardous waste collection
programs. The guidelines shall allow adequate flexibility to local agencies
in meeting their individual needs. The Board may exempt a city or county
from implementing a household hazardous waste program due to its small
size or population if the agency demonstrates that such a program is not
feasible. If this exemption occurs, the agency must demonstrate that there
is some means to address household hazardous wastes within the county.
AB 888 also states that a city or county operating a household hazardous
waste program is not liable for any damage or injury caused by an action
taken by the city or county in the course of the operation of the program
unless the action is performed in bad faith or in a negligent manner.
Finally, after a specified date, it requires permits for solid waste facilities
to contain a condition that precludes the facility from accepting waste from
a county that does not have a household hazardous waste collection
program.
17