Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12201988 - S.1 TO: HOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Supervisor Tom Torlakson Contra Supervisor Tom Powers COSta DATE: December 20, 1988 County SUBJECT: REVIEW OF CONSEQUENCES OF TRANSFER OF THE ACME FILL WASTESTREAM TO ANTIOCH GBF AND RICHMOND SITES SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECO0949NDED ACTION: (1) Direct the County Administrator and the Community Development Department to review the consequences of the transfer of the Acme Fill wastestream to the Antioch GBF and Richmond Sanitary siteto the s., • (2 ) Request the operators of GBF, Richmond Sanitary and Acme Fill to submit a closure plan as soon as possible to the Solid Waste Commission for approval. ,. ( 3 ) Direct staff to return with a report so the Board can consider further .work, city input and committee referrals. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: With the pending closure of Acme Fill, it is clear a great proportion of the Acme wastestream will be transferred to the Antioch -landfill site. A significant amount will also be transferred to the Richmond site. These transfers will have numerous significant impacts. These impacts represent both. a challenge and an opportunity for the Board._of.�-Supervisors to demonstrate how a landfill site can be. and should be operated in an environmentally appropriate manner. As a Board, we have indicated that we want new landfill activities to be operated at the "state-of-the-art" . Odors, dust, ltter, road impacts by trucks, adequate cover material and complete daily coverage of the trash are some of the very important issues that must be addressed. They should be and must be addressed in these transfer situations to the Antioch and Richmond sites. The volume of garbage to Antioch may nearly triple. Therefore, the potential for greatly increased impacts on the surrounding community increases dramatically. If most of the cover material has to be imported by trucks, the traffic impacts and road impacts will be all the greater. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE "'APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON December 20. 1933 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X -.:f- The-Board approved the above recommendations after deleting the portions which have been lined throur.h VOTE O.F=SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT III & III ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED December 20. 1933 Health Services Director Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Community Development supervisors and CountyAdmin'istrat" M3e2/7-e3 BY DEPUTY Transfer of Acme Fill Wastestream December 20, 1988 Page TWO Another issue which the Board of Supervisors has seriously supported is that of "host community" mitigation. The cities and the public are watching to see how serious we are about taking care of communities that will bear the burden of taking the county' s garbage. In East County, o lt9Jr"i( S—nxa—.Ta.ma.c- Additionally, there is the issue of closure plans and the adequate funding of appropriate plans--ones that are environmentally responsible and fully satisfactory to the neighboring communities and cities. The closures must be visually attractive and safe. Has the funding been guaranteed and what is the schedule for financing the plans and having public input to them? Has a dedicated account been set up? We should ask the City of Antioch and the City of Richmond and the operators what their cost estimates and proposed funding mechanisms are. In the Antioch case, for instance, If there is only approximately one million tons of capacity left, there is not much opportunity to collect surcharges to pay for mitigations--perhaps only one year in terms of time. Time is running out. Last, but not least, the same kind of closure information needs to be obtained regarding Acme itself. TT:gro