Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24-1985 City Council Agenda packet4 (?-5 o AGENDA BILL NO. DATE: October 24, 1985 DEPARTMENT: City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed City Administration of State Hazardous Waste Regulations Issue Summary: Would the public's health and safety be better served if Saratoga were to assume local responsibility for administration of State Hazardous Waste Regulations or if the County of Santa Clara Health _Department_were_-:to .assume that responsibility? Recommendation: Inform the County. that Saratoga does not choose to assume hazardous waste management responsibility from the County Health Department. Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: q1 b a, •1 1. Report to Council, 10/24/85 2. Letter from County Executive, 9/27/85 3. Memo from Campbell Acting Fire Chief to Campbell City Manager, 10/14/85 Council Action: 11/20: A r pp oved� staff recommendation. CITY OF SARATOGA Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. A4)042 U 04 0 'V o 0 rfo REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 10/24/85 COUNCIL MEETING: 11/ 7/85 SUBJECT: Proposed City Administration of State Hazardous Waste Regulation BACKGROUND On October 2, 1985, the City Manager received a letter from the County Executive soliciting this City's position relative to whether or not the City would be interested in being involved in implementing State Hazardous Waste Management regulations. A copy of that letter and a proposal, in draft form, for a hazardous waste plan are attached to this report. The base for this request can be summarized as follows: 1 Although the State has occupied this field of regulation, in this area, as in many others, the resources assigned to adequately administer the program throughout the State do not match the need. Nbst of the time these responsibilities for adequacy of administration devolve to the Counties as administrative arms of the State. In the instant case this has been true in many Counties in California. However, Santa Clara County, up until now, does not appear to have followed that course. 2 Santa Clara County jurisdictions have recognized the serious nature of this problem of which all of you are well aware, so I won't bore you with what you already know in this regard. However, in response to the seriousness of the problem, the Cities and the County have pioneered regulation in the area of hazardous materials storage and handling. The administration of hazardous waste storage and handling becomes the second and final component of a comprehensive scheme of regulation regarding hazardous and toxic materials. 3 Currently, the fire services agencies have been charged with the responsibility for hazardous material storage oversight. The County, as much as possible, is seeking to avoid split jurisdiction and a biforcation of effort in the administration of hazardous waste storage and handling by suggesting that those jurisdictions currently overseeing the current program oversee the other program as well rather than having a City do one and the County the other. Report to City Council Subect: Proposed City Administration of State Hazardous Waste Regulation ANALYSIS Because Saratoga does not have its own fire service, the hazardous materials program is administered by the two fire districts serving Saratoga: In order to administer the new program, qualified personnel would have to be trained in this area and assigned this task as a major portion of their work. It is also anticipated that a significant amount of clerical type work would be necessary to effectively administer the new program (see the attached memo from the Acting Fire Chief of Campbell to the Campbell City Manager). Another factor invovled is the presence of hazardous waste generating facilities current or planned in Saratoga. In this City the largest generator, by far, of hazardous waste are residential households. Paints, solvents, cleaners, laundry products, fertilizers and insecticides are present in most households. This program will not be targeted to residential hazardous waste storage and disposal. The objective of avoiding split jurisdiction in this area for Saratoga can not be avoided by Saratoga assuming responsibility for hazardous waste regulation unless we also assume the responsibility from the fire districts for the current hazardous materials regulation as well. To date, I do not believe the City has received any unsolicited indication from either fire district that it wishes to discontinue administering the current County and City ordinances. CONCLUSION Since the thrust of the County proposal is to avoid split jurisdiction where possible and since, in the case of Saratoga, that jurisdiction would be split in any event, it remains to determine whether the public health and safety would best be served by Saratoga staff administering hazardous waste regulations or whether it should be done by County Health. It is my opinion that the County will always be better equipped to perform this task than City staff because they will be able to receive better and more frequent training in this very dynamic field and because the frequency and breadth of experience in dealing with these matters would allow County personnel to always have a better experiencial background on any problem which could arise. RECOMENDATION Direct the City Manager to respond in writing to the County Executive that the City Council has considered the County proposal and believes that, for Saratoga, the best course of action would be to continue to have the County administer the hazardous waste management program as a County responsibility for that portion of the County within Saratoga' corporate limits. rry R. peacock City Mana:er jm haz.wst Attachments Page 2 County of Santa Clara California Mr. J. Wayne Dernetz, City Manager City of Saratoga City Hall 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Dernetz: September 27, 1985 As you are no doubt aware, the State Department of Health Services (DOHS) is responsible under statute for implementing all applicable State laws and regulations for the control of hazardous waste in California. This involves delegated implementation of many aspects of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as well as carrying out provisions of the California Health and Safety Code. By virtue of this statutory role, the State occupies the field of hazardous waste management, and is therefore preemptive at the local level in such regulatory activity. Unfortunately, however, because of budgetary and personnel constraints, DOHS has not yet been able to provide Santa Clara County with an effective hazardous waste control program, despite the fact that this County is the second largest producer of hazardous wastes in California. For example, the State DOHS has issued only 29 RCRA permits for treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous wastes in this County; yet an estimated 800 (or more) firms in the County actually are generating hazardous wastes today. Many of these same firms, of course, are already under permit regulation from the respective City Fire Marshals or the County Health Department under individual Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinances (the Hazmat Program). Moreover, many are also under some degree of inspection and regulation from one of the areas' three sewage treatment plants, as part of their industrial waste discharge control programs. In response to the obvious need for an improved program of hazardous waste management, the County is now preparing to join with the State DOHS in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This new MOU will provide for assumption by the County Health Department of responsibility for Countywide management of hazardous wastes. While this MOU has been patterned along the general lines of others already in existence between DOHS and other counties throughout the State, we propose to go further than have any other counties to date in the extent to which cities are actually involved in implementing this Q An Equal Opportunity Employer Office of the County Executive my Government Center, East Wing 70 West Hedding Street San Jose, California 95110 299 -2424 Area Code 408 RECEIVED OCT 2 188 CITY MANAGER City Managers Hazardous Waste Plan September 27, 1985 Page Two program. This will reflect this County's and Cities' initial development of hazmat ordinances, on which the subsequent Statewide underground tank laws have been based. Specifically, the .proposed agreement provides for delegation of authority by the County to local cities, so that they can inspect and regulate certain hazardous waste facilities within their own borders. This will allow for the integration of city inspections of hazardous waste generators with city implementation of their hazmat ordinances, and with city (or sewage treatment plant) implementation of their industrial waste discharge ordinances. I anticipate that the program resulting from this County -State agreement will give participating cities authority to enforce State laws and regulations regarding onsite hazardous waste storage and handling, and regarding preparation of wastes for transport to licensed facilities elsewhere for subsequent treatment and disposal. Essentially, the cities would have authority for surveillance and control over all those hazardous waste generators within their borders which do not require State /Federal permits. In addition, cities would have responsibility to use the required hazardous waste manifest documents to track locally generated wastes to their ultimate destination. As new Federal and State requirements on the phaseout of land disposal become fully applicable over the next several years, we anticipate that an increasing proportion of Santa Clara County's hazardous wastes will be treated rather than dumped on the land. Administratively, the cities' primary responsibility as participants under this MOU would be to provide an adequate, properly trained staff with the necessary equipment and supplies to carry out a program of hazardous waste management over all applicable generators within their borders. The County Health Department will assume responsibility under the MOU for operating the hazardous waste management program in the remaining areas of the County. Additionally, in order to promote uniformity and to provide a single channel for State /County information exchange, the Health Department will coordinate the overall Countywide program. City Managers Hazardous Waste Plan September 27, 1985 Page Three I feel strongly that the development of an effective Countywide effort at management of hazardous wastes is a high priority task for Santa Clara County, one directly related to our need to protect against further contamination of our vital groundwater aquifers. In this sense, the hazardous waste management program will reinforce the vigorous efforts which the cities of this County have taken over the past two years to implement their hazardous materials storage ordinances. I plan to discuss this whole set of toxics and groundwater protection issues with you during the next scheduled meeting of the City Managers Association. In order to move forward expeditiously with this program, the Health Department needs to identify those cities interested in assuming control of the proposed hazardous waste inspection and control program within their borders. Therefore, I am requesting that you advise the Health Department, by October 11, 1985 at the latest, whether your community wishes to assume responsibility for hazardous waste management, or whether you would rather have the County hold that responsibility. Please send your responses to the Santa Clara County Office of Hazardous Materials, 2220 Moorpark Avenue, San Jose, CA 95128. If you desire further information about this new effort, please contact Lee Esquibel at 299 -6930. le Attachment: Very truly yours, all Ree ty Executive cc: J. Kennedy Bartholet, Health Department Director Delia B. Alvarez, Director of Public Health 'David Morell, Special Assistant for Toxics Management Proposal for a Hazardous Waste Plan, SCC August 23, 195 Prepared by: Lee Esquibel I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to propose that a plan be developed for the establishment of a hazardous waste management program in Santa Clara County. The proposed plan would be based on an agreement, negotiated by the County, with the State Department of Health :services, for assumption by the County of primary responsibility for the control of hazardous wastes countywide. II. INTRODUCTION PROPOSAL FOR A HAZARDOUS WASTE PLAN Corollary to this agreement would be authorization for the County to snare authority for carrying out the program with those cities that would choose to accept the charge. The problem of hazardous materials as contaminants in the environment, particularly in groundwater used for drinking water supplies, has recently been the subject of a great deal of meoia and citizen interest. With the revelation that toxic chemicals had been found in a groundwater supply in South San Jose and with tne continuous discovery of new spills involving toxic materials, the citizens of Santa Clara County have been made aware of what many consider the environmental challenge of the 1930's: Contamination of the environ- ment, especially our groundwater supplies, by hazardous materials. This new awareness, while not always accompanied by an accurate under st:,ndin of the problem, has served to focus governmental and community concern on seeking and developing methods for proper manage- ment of hazardous materials. III. BACKGRGUND As a result of growing concern over tne increasing number of toxic waste incidents nationwide, Congress, in 1975, enacted the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act which made the Environmental Protection Agency the primary unit for overseeing a comprehensive Federal program for the proper manar,ment of hazardous wastes. In the late 1970's, the Environmental Protection Agency, satisfied that California had developed an acceptable hazardous waste management program, delegated responsibility to the State for the enforcement of most of. the Federal program. The Department of Health Services, Toxic Substances Control Division was the unit directly charged with responsibility for implementing the hazardous waste management program. Jr) fact_, development of the California hazardous waste control law has made California regulation and control, in theory, more stringent' in certain areas than the Fedcral act. Reco sizing that the feic•r<,1 program has some loopholes, California law is designed to include regulation of small hazardous waste generators which, while they constitute approximately 92;. of all hazardous waste producing facili- ties, do not receive the same regulatory attention from Lhe EPA as larger facilities J.o. Nevertheless, despite acceptance of responsibility by tnc State for regulatory control of hazardous wastes and general recognition that a lac;c of proper controls could result in serious lane renee consequences to the environment, inadequate staffing levels and a lack of funding for the Department of Health Services have resulted in inadequate surveillance and control of hazardous waste generators statewide. As the State and Federal govern!Jcnt were dt vclo;.,in,; ree.ul atery programs for hazardous wastes, all the major cities in Santa C1 ar o County end the County government, concerned with the uenecr to tee community and to the groundwater supplies posed by the presence in the valley of large Em:,unts of toxic substances, developed a model hazardous materials managment ordinance which was designed tD regulate the storage of all hazardous materials. At about the same tine, the State legislature began to pass various laws, such as the Sher Bill, designed to enhance the regulation of hazardous materials storage. Because Federal and State hazardous waste regulations do not concern themselves with non -waste hazardous substances, the new ordinances and statutes were necessary to close large gap in the regulatory framework intended to protect our groundwater. IV. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY Each of the cities in Santa Clara County, except for Los Altos, has adopted a local hazardous materials storage ordinance. Eecn of these ordinances is based on the original model ordinance: which requires that all facilities storing hazardous materials must obtain a hazardous materials permit and must, as a part of the permitting process, disclose the nature and the amount of the materials stored. Inspection, monitoring and construction standards for storage facilities are addressed in the ordinances. In most cities, local fire departments have been appointed as enforcing agencies for the hazardous materials ordinance. Fire inspectors enforce local fire codes in addition to their inspection responsiLilities under the ordinance. The County Office of Hazardous l :ateri;,ls in the County Health Department currently enforces the Hazardous Materials "ardinance withir: the unincorporated area of the County, as well as in the cities of Los Altos Hills, Saratoga and Monte Sereno, and in all County facilities regardless of location. Because Los Altos did not adopt the model ordinance, underground storage of hazardous materials in that city is regulated under the Slier Bill by the County Office of Hazardous Materials. 2 V. THE PROBLEM lr► Santa Clara County, facilities which use hazardous substances, either in their manufacturing processes or as a commodity in their business, are subject to control in the storage of that substance by each local jurisdiction where they are located. Each such jurisdiction under its normal police powers can regulate where and how hazardous substances are stored; and, because of the need for e►ncr1;ency personnel to know what sort of hazard they might have to face-in an emergency situation at the facility, they also may require from the facility a hazardous materials inventory. When the hazardous substance, which has been under the storage oversight of the local jurisdiction, has been used in a manufacturing process, it becomes a hazardous waste and it then comes under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Department of Health Services, which has the responsibility for monitoring surveillance over the handling, transportation and final disposal of hazardous wastes off the site. Unfortunately, as•indicated earlier, the State does not have the staff resources necessary to even begin a proper surveillance program at the local level. As a result, there is no documentation for where thousands of „tons of hazardous wastes are disposed. Clearly, there is a need for an effective program of surveillance and regulation of hazardous waste generators in Santa Clara County; and, because the State will only delegate responsibility for a hazardous waste management program to a Health Department, the only agency in Santa Clara County able to assume that responsibility is the County -Health Department. This leads then to the_basic problem at issue. If the Health Department did aszume the hazardous waste program from the State, subsequent inspections -by County personnel of hazardous waste generators within a city could be viewed as redundant if the same facility were also inspected by city personnel because of hazardous material storage. Aside from the issues of over regulation and overlapping responsibility, the situation of two ,separate agencies requiring separate fees from the same facility for what appears to be similar work'could be an arca_of concern to private industry and to the cities. IV. THE PROPOSAL It is proposed that the County Health Department develop a plan for assuming responsibility for the hazardous waste program in Santa Clara County. Responsibility would be assumed by negotiating a memorandum of agreement with the State Department of Health Services. It is further proposed that the agreement include a provision allowing the County to share authority with those cities in the County that wish to carry out hazardous waste activities in their jurisdiction. 3 VII. DISCUSSION The plan as proposed would include the rationale for assumption of the program by the County. It would also have to be specific on what the program to be assumed would consist of in terms of authority parameters, budgetary requirements, laboratory needs, space requirements and staffing needs. o A definition of the roles and functions of the hazardous Materials Unit and the District Attorney's office in enforce- ment. o Specific guidelines on how the functions of city personnel would mesh with the County's responsibilities. o Procedures for coordinating complaint investigations, reports required by the State and administrative remedies for correction of violations. o A proposal for assuring that city personnel and County personnel are qualified to function in the area of hazardous wastes. The plan must :hake certain that several issues are clearly presented: o That if a city should choose not to take part in the program, the County, having interjurisdictional capability, would have to assume the necessary activity in the city. o That the assumption within a city would be within certain statutory areas and would not overlap the present hazardous material activity of city personnel. That the program, where carried out by the County, would be on a fee for service basis as allowed by State law. o That if there is liability for the County in assuming the program, an explanation of what that liability entails and what it could mean in terms of cost. o That the County would assume no emergency response activity except as a resource unit. Because the scope of activity by the Health Department in ny hazardous waste management program proposal would be unclear until preliminary discussions with the cities and the State have begun', it seems appropriate to suggest that the proposed plan be worked on in conjunction with these discussions. It might prove to be that the assumption by the County of the overal hazardous waste function, with or without the cities' participation, might place us in an untenable position with regard to liability. The concept of joint city /County activity may be impossible, given the cities' possible lack of interest in assuming a burden not directly translatable into local benefit. In any event, a plan reflective of the actual situation would be more useful than one that would, from its inception, be unrealistic. The target audience for the plan would, presumably, be the Board of Supervisors and the various city administrators and city councils. 5 TO: K. Duggan, City Manager October 14, 1985 FROM: Gary K. Smith, Acting Fire Chief SUBJ: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WASTE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION: That the City of Campbell require additional information on the County's proposed Hazardous Materials Waste Management Program before any decision is made that would include Campbell as part of the program. BACKGROUND: MEMORANDUM Campbell Fire Department personnel are currently inspecting over 500 occupancies to ensure safe storage and use of a wide range of hazardous materials. We enforce the city's hazardous materials storage ordinance as well-as provisions of adopted model codes, such as the Uniform Fire Code. Through a process of screening business licenses and performing field inspections, we have identified the locations in the City where hazardous materials are being used or stored. Hazardous materials facilities are divided into "long form sites" which store more than 55 gallons of liquids or 500 pounds of solids; or "short form sites" which use smaller amounts of materials. We have identified approximately 210 "long form facilities" and 135 "short form facilities." Of these facilities, 120 have underground storage tanks. We ascertain requirements for safe storage of materials and advise businesses of permit requirements. Hazardous materials storage permits are $150 /year for "long form facilities" and $75 /year for "short form facilities." We have made inspections and issued permits for 100% of our underground facilities, 80% of our other "long form facilities," and 50% of our "short form facilities." During field visits, inspectors check for safe storage of materials, secondary containment in case of leakage, monitoring devices, and necessary emergency equipment. Field inspection times may range from 30 minutes on a small facility to several hours on a large complex. TO: Kevin Duggan, City Manager October 14,1985 SUBJ: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WASTE PROGRAM GKS /cb Hazwaste The County's proposal deals with hazardous waste, and this should not be confused with the broader subject of storage and handling of hazardous materials in general. The County Executive, Sally Reed, has written each city manager, outlining a county -wide hazardous waste management program. The State Department of Health Services has legal responsibility for inspecting sites that generate hazardous waste and tracking waste disposal. Under Law, the State pre empts this area of enforcement, so this does not fall under the scope of our code enforcement dealing with hazardous materials. The County wants to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the DOHS and assume responsibility for a county -wide hazardous waste program. They want to delegate the actual enforcement to those cities who agree to participate. We do not have enough information at this time to fully evaluate the scope of this enforcement program. The intent of this program is to track hazardous materials from "cradle to grave." We agree that it would be logical to have the same inspectors now doing hazardous materials code enforcement get involved with inspecting hazardous waste on site. However, if this responsibility includes extensive audits of invoices and manifests, the added workload could easily overwhelm our current staff and resources. As we understand it, the system requires keeping track of hazardous materials as they come into a business. It requires monthly inspections to monitor the storage of wastes generated. It then includes tracking each shipment of hazardous waste to its ultimate destination and disposal. Even for a city our size, this could mean an extensive clerical workload dealing with 350 businesses. While we would like to avoid having inspectors from two agencies deal with hazardous substances in the same occupancies, the technical and clerical requirements of this hazardous materials waste program may be well beyond our current resources. We feel that, without additional information on the scope of the program and training required, we cannot make an informed decision at this time as to whether or not the City of Campbell should opt to become part of the program. AGENDA BILL NO. DATE: 10/23/85 '313 DEPARTMENT: City Manager CITY OF SARATOGA Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Appropriations Resolution for Reformatting and Rebinding Municipal Code Issue Summary $8,000 was provided in the 1984 -85 City Clerk's budget for reformatting and rebinding the Municipal Code. The work was not completed in the 1984 -85 fiscal year, and no bills were suhnitted to the City Clerk in that period. The City Attorney is now nearing cam pletion of the work and will soon sdbmit bills for printing and binding the code. The funds need to be appropriated for the 1985 -86 fiscal year because it is too late to pay bills from 1984 -85 appropriations. No funds need to be appropriated for the City Attorney's bills for his time in connection with the project, because those bills were submitted with his regular bills. The remaining printing and binding costs are estimated at $5,000 at most, and this is the amount recommended for appropriation. Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2241.9 appropriating $5,000. Fiscal Impacts Transfer $5,000 from General Fund reserves to City Clerk's budget. Exhibits /Attachments Resolution 2141.9 Council Action 11/20: Approved. Subsidiary: RESOLUTION NO. 2241.9 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS AND AMENDING THE 1985 -86 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET WHEREAS, it is recommended that the following adjustment be made increasing the present budget appropriations: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the budget of the City of Saratoga adopted by Resolution 2241.0 be amended as follows: Transfer: $5,000.00 from general ledger account 21 -2909 general fund reserve for appropriations increases, to general ledger account 21 -2941, general fund appropriations. Fund 21 General Fund Program 210 City Clerk Account 21- 4320 210 -20 Printing and Binding Purpose: To increase appropriations to print and bind the City Municipal Code revisions. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the day of ,by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor DATE: S DEPIrMENT: City Manager AGENDA BILL NO. 7 3 10/23/85 Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2241.9 appropriating $5,000. Exhibits /Attachments Resolution 2141.9 Council Action CITY OF SARATOGA Fiscal Impacts Transfer $5,000 from General Fund reserves to City Clerk's budget. Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Appropriations Resolution for Reformatting and Rebinding Municipal Code Issue Summary $8,000 was provided in the. 1984 -85 City Clerk's budget for reformatting and rebinding the Municipal Code. The work was not completed in the 1984 -85 fiscal year, and no bills were submitted to the City Clerk in that period. The City Attorney is now nearing can pletion of the work and will soon submit bills for printing and binding the code. The funds need to be appropriated for the 1985 -86 fiscal year because it is too late to pay bills from 1984 -85 appropriations. No funds need to be appropriated for the City Attorney's bills for his time in connection with the project, because those bills were sdbmitted with his regular bills. The remaining printing and binding costs are estimated at $5,000 at most, and this is the amount recommended for appropriation. D :ial: AGENDA BILL NO: f�p 0 Dept. Head: DATE: October 22, 1985 City Atty: DEPARTMENT: Maintenance City Mgr: SUBJECT: Hakone Gardens Donation Fiscal Impact $450 donation. Attachments Council Action 11/20: Approved. 1 Issue Summary Mr. Gunter Helmholz of Los Gatos donated seven (7) Nishikigoi (fancy Japanese carp) to Hakone Garden. The value of this donation is $450. Recommendation Accept and acknowledge this donation by way of a letter from the Mayor.