Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05211985 - 2.1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this. order on May 21i 1985 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers , Schroder , Torlakson, and Fanden NOES: None i ABSENT: Supervisor McPeak ABSTAIN: None I { SUBJECT: Request of the City of Berkeley for use of the West Contra- Costa Landfill Site . The Board on April 23, 1985 referred the request of the City of Berkeley regarding that city's continued use of West Contra Costa Landfill. to the Public Works Director, Environmental Control Division, for review and recommendation. With the assignment of the Environmental Control Division of the Public Works Department to the newly created Community Development Department , A.A. Dehaesus , Director of that Department , in the May 10, 1985 report to the Board , (copy of which attached hereto, and by reference incorporated herein) set forth three recom- mendations relative to 'the disposal of Berkeley waste to West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill site . Supervisor Powers advised thathe was in agreement with recommendation number three , but had some concern with the first recommendation. He expressed reservations on the importation of solid waste , not only between County lines , but between areas within the County. Supervisor Powers stressed the importance of receiving input from the West County cities on the standards that they believe are appropriate to mitigate the impact of traffic , noise, and other environmental quality degregations that can occur or impact on a particular area in West County. Supervisor Torlakson also expressed concern with recommen- dation number one, for the reason that it might give false signals to the City of Berkeley and others who might be importing refuse into the County for disposition at a landfill site . Supervisor Powers stressed the importance that standards are developed with input from appropriate communities that will lead to the establish- ment fora long term import policy because it will be the first one of these that will have been accomplished in Contra Costa County. He did not believe that the County should .refuse to accept refuse from the neighboring communities outside Contra Costa County, but that it should be reciprocal-. There may be a time when landfill sites within the County will have reached their capacity and it will become necessary for the County to use the landfill sites in an adjacent community. Supervisor Torlakson suggested that at this time it might be prudent to include in the negotiation process discussions with the Solid Waste Commission of Alameda County. He suggested that the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and the Waste Management Authority may be willing to be giving Contra Costa County capacity credit so that in a crisis this County could utilitze their landfill without having to go through a great deal of red tape at the last minute. Again, he voiced his concern with respect to recommendation number one , but that he was ready to approve recommendations numbers two and three . Supervisor Powers recommended that recommendation number one be modified to read: "The Board is willing to negotiate for a temporary continuance of disposal of Berkeley wastes through 1987 between now and the end of the year at West Contra Costa Landfill" . Board members , being in agreement , IT IS ORDERED that , recommendations two and three are approved as presented . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that recommendation number one is modified as recommended by Supervisor Powers . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this . issue is referred to the Internal Operations Committee for review at its June 10, 1985 meeting. I hereby certify that this is -:,rue and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL BATCI'.=L R, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By Q./D- Z� , Deputy 47 cc: Internal Operations Committee Community Development Director County Administrator i t . . tontra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa FROM: A. A. DEHAESUS, DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �lJur DATE: MAY 10, 1985 r SUBJECT: BERKE-LEY-- REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF IMPORT OF SOLID WASTE TO THE WEST CONTRA COSTA SANITARY LANDFILL Specific Requests or Recommendations & Background & Justification RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. The Board state that the temporary continuance of disposal Berkeley wastes through December 1987 at the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill could be consistent with the County Solid Waste 'Management Plan taking into account the special circumstances of the Berkeley request. 2. The Board authorize the Community Development Department to negotiate with Berkeley, Richmond Sanitary Service, the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Authority, and cities and districts currently using the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill to ensure that mitigation and compensation is provided by Berkeley for adverse impacts from the import of the waste. 3. After agreement is reached between all parties, the agreement be brought to the Board of Supervisors for review and a determination of consistency with the County Solid Waste Management Plan. FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct financial impact to Contra Costa County. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND On April 23, 1985, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Community Development Department a letter from the City of Berkeley, dated April 4, 1985, requesting a determination of consistency to the Contra Costa County, Solid Waste Management Plan the continuance of disposal of waste from the City of Berkeley at the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill, until December 1987. The letter from Berkeley was in response to a letter from staff informing Berkeley that a consistency determination from the Board would be necessary for continuance of Berkeley's waste being disposed at the landfill beyond "mid-1985". The City of'=Berkeley owns a transfer station, completed in 1983. In 1983, a contract was executed between Richmond Sanitary Service, the owners an operat sof the West 77\ Continue on attachment: X yes Signature: j R endation of County Administrator R nd ibn 9VBoard Committee pprove Other: Signature(s): Costa Sanitary Landfill (WCCSL), and BFI, contracted operators of the Berkeley transfer station, for disposal of waste from the transfer station. The amount of waste has been averaging between 200 to 250 tons per day. The WCCSL disposes of approximately 1,000 tons per day of solid wastes, including waste from Berkeley. The contract between the Berkeley transfer station and the WCCSL is annually renewable. Berkeley and the WCCSL are currently negotiating the terms and conditions of the renewal. Both parties know the County' s and the West County cities' intention to be involved in the decision about the continuance of solid waste import from Berkeley. Both parties appear to be willing to work with the County on this matter. There are several issues that the Board should consider in evaluating this matter: 1. It is likely that waste from Central County will need to be exported to Alameda County after Acme Fill closes in June of 1987. County staff is preparing an application to the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Authority to request that Contra Costa County waste be disposed of at Alameda County landfills. Negotiations with Alameda County will not be easy, and there is no guarantee that the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Authority .will approve the import of Contra Costa County waste, even on a short-term basis. An outright denial of Berkeley waste, would be detrimental to future negotiations with Alameda County to allow importation of Contra Costa County waste. 2. Because capacity of the WCCSL is limited, 'the West County cities have expressed concern about continued import into the WCCSL. The imported waste will cause the landfill to close sooner than if no imports were allowed. After the WCCSL is closed, West County waste will have to be disposed of at a more distant, expensive landfill . There is sentiment among the West County cities that importers, such as Berkeley, should be assessed a surcharge to recognize the added cost that their import impacts on West County residents. Other mitigation measures may be proposed addressing concerns such as increased traffic, noise, "environmental quality", etc. 3. In Alameda County, the import from the City of San Francisco to Altamont landfill is assessed a $3.00 per ton "royalty". This royalty is collected by Oakland Scavenger, the Altamont landfill operator, and distributed to the cities and districts using the Altamont Landfill. This royalty is above and beyond traffic mitigation paid for by San Francisco. The distribution of the royalty from Oakland Scavenger is through the franchise agreements between the cities and districts and Oakland Scavenger. 4. Continued import of waste from Berkeley to the WCCSL will shorten its remaining life by approximately one year, based on Berkeley waste continuing until December 1987. It is estimated that the WCCSL will reach capacity in 1993 if Berkeley importing ends now. Unlimited import of Berkeley waste results in the landfill reaching capacity in 1991. Continuance of the Berkeley import until December 1987 (the requested date) results in the WCCSL reaching capacity in 1992. 5. If Berkeley does not take its waste to WCCSL, Berkeley's waste will most likely be disposed of at either the Altamont or Vasco Road landfill in eastern Alameda County. Because Berkeley has a transfer station, use of these landfills should not cause an operational° hardship to the City of Berkeley. The main reason the City of Berkeley is using the WCCSL is to reduce costs. Mr. Larry Burch of Richmond Sanitary Service has estimated that the additional transportation cost for Berkeley to use Altamont or Vasco R6ad site is $1 to $2 per ton. This figure is consistent with the data in the County/Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Study. Additional unquantifiable costs may be borne by Berkeley because of additional wear and tear on transfer vehicles and the possible need to buy additional transfer vehicles to account for the longer transportation time to the more distant landfills. 6. The Board of Supervisors has asked staff to develop an import policy statement that would apply to all imports coming into Contra Costa County. The import policy statement is undergoing staff review. The import policy statement will require additional review by the Solid Waste Commission and the Board of Supervisors before it can be adopted. Time is of the essence, therefore the Berkeley import issue should be decided based on existing County policy. There are four basic alternatives: 1. The Board could find that the continuance of Berkeley waste is not consistent with the County Solid Waste Management Plan and that the Board intends not to approve an . amendment to the Solid Waste Management Plan which would make Berkeley's waste consis- 2 t tent. This alternative is not recommended because it would. not, show, a "spirit of cooperation" with Alameda County, which may be necessary to 'secure export of Contra Costa County waste to Alameda County after Acme Fill closes. 2. The Board could find that continuance Of Berkeley waste- is not consistent with the County Solid Waste Management Plan, but agree to process an amendment to the Plan to provide for waste importation. Approval by a majority of-the cities containing a majority of the incorporated population would -be required. This alternative is feasible, but is somewhat cumbersome and lengthy--and. may not.be approved. 3. The Board could find that continuance of Berkeley waste is consistent with County Solid Waste Management Plan and can proceed 'without any further approvals. This alternative is not recommended because if Berkeley's waste is allowed to continue to come to Contra Costa County, ,--.some mitigation and compensation should be provided by Berkeley. 4. The Board could find that the continuance of Berkeley wasteis consistent with the County Solid Waste Management Plan taking into account the special circumstances. of the Berkeley request and if adequate mitigation is assured. These special circumstances include the fact that accepting Berkeley wastes is realistic for geographic reasons, that it is a continuation of current practice, and that such an inter-county cooperation recognizes regional concerns in waste disposal. Adequate mitigations would be necessary to offset adverse effects of the continuance of Berkeley wastes. This is the recom- mended alternative. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION 1. Berkeley would have to dispose of its wastes at another landfill , presumably Vasco Road or Altamont Landfill in Alameda County. 2. . An outright denial of Berkeley wastes may jeopardize future negotiations with Alameda County regarding export of wastes from Contra Costa County after Acme Fill closes in 1987. 3. The capacity of the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill will be extended approximately one year, to 1993. 3