HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04201993 - IO.3 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
CLERK OF THE BOARD
TO: Nancy Tannehill DATE: May 13, 1993
Grand Jury Secretary
FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Cler}d','-yrs
SUBJECT: Response to the Grand Jury Hazardous Materials Report
Attached is a second copy of the Internal Operations Committee
(I0. 3) Report to the Board on April 20, 1993 in response to the
Grand Jury's Report on Hazardous Materials. Copies of the
certified Board Action were distributed by April 27, 1993 , with a
copy also noted for the Grand Jury. It is my understanding that
members of the Grand Jury were also provided with copies of this
report at the Board meeting.
Therefore, I am at a loss to explain why you did not receive a
copy.
jm
Attachment
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,E L I .0.-
�� f Uontra
INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
FRif \.G.;: CosC
ta
County
April 12, 1993
DATE:
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE 1992-93 GRAND JURY ON
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Adopt the Cattached response as the Board' s required response to the
Report of the 1992-93 Grand Jury on Hazardous Materials .
BACKGROUND:
On January 31, 1993, the Grand Jury issued its report #9301 on the
management of Hazardous Materials Programs . The report was
received by the Board of Supervisors on February 9, 1993 and was
referred to our Committee as well as to the County Administrator.
The County Administrator was asked to make a status report to the
Board on February 23, 1993'. Our Committee met on April 12, 1993
with the County Administrator, Health Services Director, County
Health Officer, members of the Grand Jury and Denny Larson of
Citizens for a Better Environment. We reviewed and amended the
proposed response from staff and are now recommending it to the
Board of Supervisors for the Board' s approval . The Grand Jury
report included five recommendations which we propose that the
Board of Supervisors respond to as is outlined in the attached
report. - The outline of the proposed response follows a format
developed in conjunction with a prior Grand Jury and consists of a
response which clearly specifies :
A. Whether the recommendation is accepted or adopted;
B. If the recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will
be responsible for implementation by a definite target date;
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD C M T
APPROVE OTHER !
<tk-
_..
SIGNATURE S
ACTION OF BOARD ON April 20, 1993 APPA VED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED6�,,Za2o, / 9-5;
Contact: PHIL BATC ELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Health Services Director
Superior Court Judge Richard S. Flier
Foreman, 1992-93 Grand Jury BY DEPUTY
r � .
I.O.-3
C. A delineation of constraints if a recommendation is accepted
but cannot be implemented within the calendar year or, in
precisely the manner suggested; and
D. The reason for not adopting a recommendation.
The report of the 1992-93 Grand Jury on the management of Hazardous
Materials Programs, received an extremely high level of attention
from both the County Administrator and Health Services Director
because of the serious nature of the conclusions and findings . The
County Administrator immediately convened a meeting with the senior
staff from the Health Services Department, including the Health
Services Director, the County Health Officer and the Executive
Assistant to the Hazardous Materials Commission. The County
Administrator asked for and was granted a meeting with the Grand
Jury which turned out to be very helpful in getting a clearer
picture of the problems as the Grand Jury viewed them. A
preliminary report addressing the issues which had been raised by
the Grand Jury was made to the Board of Supervisors on February 23,
1993. That report included several preliminary findings which were
the result of several meetings and discussions with all of the
principal involved individuals.
As was announced as a part of the joint report from the County
Administrator and Health Services Director on February 23, 1993,
Mr. Lewis Pascalli has been reassigned full time within the Health
Services Department to provide on-site management of the Hazardous
Materials Programs. The County Administrator directed that a
detailed work plan and time table be prepared which would
accomplish certain objectives within specified timeframes . The
County Administrator has personally met with Mr. Pascalli, Mr.
Finucane, Dr. Walker & Ms. Masters on a bi-weekly schedule since
February to review the progress which was being made on each
element of the work plan and insure that the time table was being
adhered to. In addition, Mr. Finucane and appropriate members of
his senior staff have met on a weekly basis to provide more
detailed oversight of the progress on each of the eleven identified
issues. Attached to this report are more detailed reports from Mr.
Batchelor and Mr. Finucane, along with a letter from the Chairman
of the Hazardous Materials Commission, the report which was
prepared by Mr. Howard Hatayama at the request of the Health
Services Director last fall, other related documents regarding the
Hazardous Materials Commission and a copy of the detailed Plan of
Correction on each of the eleven identified issues, including the
bi-weekly progress reports on each issue. All of these documents
should be considered integral parts of the proposed response to the
Grand Jury's Report.
2
I.O.-3
RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE 1992-93 GRAND JURY ON HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS PROGRAMS '
RECOMMENDATION NO. 1:
Immediately relieve the Health Services Department of
responsibility for implementation of Section 25500 of the Health
and Safety Code.
RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications.
B. As is noted in the attached Plan of Correction, the County
Administrator has directed that an identified individual be
assigned responsibility for accomplishing each of the
responses to the eleven identified issues and to do so by a
specified date. The County Administrator has also directed
that detailed sheets be prepared on each issue in order to
provide the status, on a bi-weekly basis, of the progress
toward accomplishing each of the identified objectives. We
assume that underlying the Grand Jury' s recommendation was the
basic interest in getting the identified problems "fixed" .
C. At this time, it appears to the Board of Supervisors that
satisfactory progress is being made on each of the identified
issues . The bi-weekly meetings are continuing and will
continue for the indefinite future. Whether it will
eventually be necessary to remove the Hazardous Materials
Programs from the Health Services Department will depend on
the continued progress which is made in the coming months. It
is important to note that the Hazardous Materials Programs
need to be coordinated closely with Public Health and the
general Environmental Health Programs.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 2:
Immediately reassign the Hazardous Materials Division, on an
interim basis, to the Office of the County Administrator pending a
complete assessment of corrective actions necessary to bring the
County into compliance with AB 2185.
RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications .
B. The County Administrator and Health Services Director will be
responsible for continuing to assess the corrective actions
which are necessary to bring the County into compliance with
AB 2185.
C. It appears that the important objective here is to give the
identified problems a high priority for resolution, to develop
a realistic action plan, and then to closely monitor progress
toward achieving the identified objectives. We do not believe
that an immediate organizational reassignment to the County
Administrator's Office is necessary in order to achieve these
objectives . The increased involvement of the County
Administrator through the bi-weekly meetings with Health
Services staff and the on-going involvement of the County
Administrator, who chairs the Hazardous Materials Council, are
believed to be sufficient to insure rapid progress in
resolving the identified problems. The County Administrator
will continue to evaluate the need for any other
organizational changes. The Board of Supervisors believes the
0rogress which is being made, as is evidenced by the Plan of
`r-orrection, accomplishes the Grand Jury's underlying goal.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 3:
Immediately authorize :a new position, Director of Hazardous
Materials, to be funded from AB 2185 revenues and direct the County
Administrator to fill the position within sixty days of the
authorization. Responsibilities of the Director of Hazardous
Materials should include developing and instituting standard
.operating procedures and supervise staff to insure the Hazardous
I.O.-3
Materials should include developing and instituting standard
operating procedures and supervise staff to insure the Hazardous
Materials Division operations comply with all county and state
mandates .
RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted.
B. The Health Services Director will be responsible for the
implementation of this objective. The objective has been.
accomplished on an acting basis.
C. As has been noted previously, Mr. Pascalli has been reassigned
to provide on-site management of Hazardous Materials Programs .
The precise mix of technical and managerial skills which are
required for this position will be reviewed over the next
several months by the Health Services Director, discussed with
staff in the Personnel Department and appropriate actions will
be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for a permanent
classification, qualifications and salary level. Pending
those decisions, and as can be seen from the Plan of
Correction, Mr. Pascalli has instituted standard operating
procedures and is moving forward in a prompt manner to insure
full compliance with all county and state mandates.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 4 :
Concurrently, appoint a Hazardous Materials Task Force comprised of
community, business, local government, and fire district
representatives . The Task Force will evaluate organizational
models including, but not limited to, decentralization, integration
within local fire districts of inspection and emergency responses
services as well as privatization of these services.
a. Within 120 days of appointment, the Task Force present its
recommendations for a proposed Area Plan and Inspection Plan
to the Board of Supervisors. Funding required to support the
Task Force to be paid from AB 2185 revenues.
b. Within 30 days of receiving the recommendations of the
Hazardous Materials Task Force, the Board of Supervisors
approve the updated Area Plan and Inspection Plan and submit
them to the State of California for certification.
RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications .
.B. The Hazardous Materials Commission will be responsible for
evaluating alternative organizational structures for the
Hazardous Materials Division and for providing their
recommendations to the Internal Operations Committee. This is
to be accomplished as follows:
* Chief Little and other appropriate fire officials are to
be consulted regarding various organizational models,
following which staff are to prepare a series of
organizational alternatives for consideration by the
Hazardous Materials Commission.
* The Hazardous Materials Commission is requested to
conduct a series of community meetings in various parts
of the County, .at times which are convenient for working'
individuals, to receive input from the community
regarding which alternative is judged to be most
appropriate in this County.
* The Hazardous Materials Commission is to set the date,
place and time for these community meetings in
consultation with those community groups which are in the
best position to know what arrangements will prove most
likely to generate thorough community input.
2
.' ... '"•s sir:••' ..;a.:.c ..:....
•s.�` .M.:.ifAsieP
I.O.-3
* Before conducting any of these meetings, the Hazardous
Materials Commission is requested to prepare and forward
to the Internal Operations Committee a Workplan outlining
how and when these meetings will take place and when the
Commission will have recommendations on organizational
alternatives available for review by the Internal
Operations Committee.
The Hazardous Materials Commission is also asked to consider
the wisdom of making changes to the membership of the
Commission in order to provide additional seats for
individuals representing those communities which are most
likely to be impacted by hazardous materials and hazardous
waste releases and to report their conclusions and
recommendations to Internal Operations Committee.
The Health Services Director will be responsible for insuring
that the Area Plan and Inspection Plan are 'presented to the
Hazardous Materials Commission for the Commission's review in
a timely manner.
C. The Grand Jury noted that the Board of Supervisors needs a
comprehensive, objective evaluation of the appropriate
organizational placement of the Hazardous Materials Division,
particularly in light of the fact that the Richmond Fire
Department does both inspections as well as emergency response
and that the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District does
emergency response. Mr. Larson noted that having the
Hazardous Materials Commission meet in the middle of the
afternoon at a location in central county which is not easily
accessible to the general public in those communities most
likely to be impacted by hazardous materials incidents does
not generate much opportunity for legitimate community input.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 5:
Immediately establish a method for continuous monitoring of the
performance of the Hazardous Materials Division to assure citizens
of compliance with all county and state Hazardous Materials
mandates .
RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted.
B. The Internal Operations Committee, Hazardous Materials
Commission, County Administrator and Health Services Director
will be responsible for continuing to monitor the performance
of the Hazardous Materials Division.
C. The Grand Jury clarified that part of their intent with this
recommendation was to insure that the Board of Supervisors
received regular reports on the status of the functioning of
the Hazardous Materials Division. To accomplish this, the
Health Services Director should make monthly reports to the
Hazardous Materials Commission and quarterly reports for the
next year to the Internal Operations Committee. At any time
that the Commission believes that there is a problem with the
operation of any aspect of the Hazardous Materials Division,
the Commission is requested to share that information with the
Internal Operations Committee so we can report it to the full
Board of Supervisors. The Commission should feel free to
question the operation of any program within the Hazardous
Materials Division and assure itself that all programs are
operating as intended.
The meetings in the community should also be used by the
Hazardous Materials Commission to gain public input into the
functioning of any and all programs under the jurisdiction of
the Hazardous Materials Division.
3
• , t ,••
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
C O N T R A C 0 S T A C 0 U N T Y
Administration Building
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, California 94553
DATE: April 8, 1993
TO: Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak
Supervisor Jeff Smith
INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
FRON: Phil �Bat�loi . County A.dmintF1: retor
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE 1992-93 GRAND JURY
ON HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
INTRODUCTION:
On January 31, 1993, the Grand Jury issued its report #9301 on the
management of Hazardous Materials Programs. The report was
received by the Board of Supervisors on February 9, 1993 and was
referred to your Committee as well as to the County Administrator.
The County Administrator was asked to make a status report to the
Board on February 23, 1993. The Grand Jury report included five
recommendations which we propose that the Board .of Supervisors
respond to as is outlined in the following report. The outline of
the proposed response follows a format developed in conjunction
with a prior Grand Jury and consists of a response which clearly
specifies:
A. Whether the recommendation is accepted or adopted;
B. If the recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will
be responsible for implementation by a definite target date;
C. A delineation of constraints if a recommendation is accepted
blit cannot be - implemen}ed within the calendar year or in
precisely the manner suggested; and
D. The reason for not adopting a recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
The report of the 1992-93 Grand Jury on the management of Hazardous
Materials Programs, a copy of which is attached for your
Committee' s reference, received an extremely high level of
attention from both the County Administrator and Health Services
Director because of the serious nature of the conclusions and
findings. The County Administrator immediately convened a meeting
with the senior staff from the Health Services Department,
including the Health Services Director, the County Health Officer
and the Executive Assistant to the Hazardous Materials Commission.
The County Administrator asked for a meeting with the Grand Jury
which turned out to be very helpful in getting a clearer picture of
the problems as the Grand Jury viewed them. A preliminary report
addressing the issues which had been raised by the Grand Jury was
made to the Board of Supervisors on February 23, 1993. That report
included several preliminary findings which were the result of
several meetings and discussions with all of the principal involved
individuals. That report is also attached for your Committee' s
ready reference. It is now time for your Committee to review the
following formal response from the Board of Supervisors to the
Grand Jury, discuss it with the Grand Jury, make any changes your
Committee deems necessary and appropriate and then report the
-p° gp.osed'=response to the full Board of Supe��iisors `for-.its-11ni arI=: - `=
action.
As was announced as a part of the joint report: from the County
Administrator and Health Services Director on February 23, 1993,
Mr. Lewis Pascalli has been reassigned full time within the Health
Services Department to provide on-site management. of the Hazardous
Materials Programs. The County Administrator directed that a
detailed work plan and time table be prepared which would
accomplish certain objectives within specified timeframes. The
County Administrator has personally met with Mr. Pascalli, Mr.
Finucane, Dr. Walker & Ms. Masters on a bi-weekly schedule since
February to review the progress which was being made on each
element of the work plan and insure that the time table was being
adhered to. In addition, Mr. Finucane and appropriate members of
his senior staff have met on a weekly basis to provide more
detailed oversight of the progress on each of the eleven identified
issues . Attached to this report is a more detailed report from Mr.
Finucane, along with a letter from the Chairman of the Hazardous
Materials Commission, the report which was prepared by Mr. Howard
Hatayama at the request of the Health Services Director last fall,
other related documents regarding the Hazardous Materials
Commission and a copy of the detailed Plan of Correction on each of
the eleven identified issues, including the bi-weekly progress
reports on each issue. All of these documents should be considered
integral parts of the proposed response to the Grand Jury's Report.
PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE GRAND JURY:
RECOMMENDATION NO. 1:
Immediately relieve the Health Services Department of
responsibility for implementation of Section 25500 of the Health
and Safety Code.
PROPOSED RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications .
2
Y
B. As is noted in the attached Plan of Correction, the County
Administrator has directed that an identified individual be
assigned responsibility for accomplishing each of the
responses to the eleven identified issues and to do so by a
specified date. The County Administrator has also directed
that detailed sheets be prepared on each issue in order to
provide the status, on a bi-weekly basis, of the progress
toward accomplishing each of the identified objectives. We
assume that underlying the Grand Jury's recommendation was the
basic interest in getting the identified problems "fixed" .
C. At this time, it appears to the County Administrator that
satisfactory progress is being made on each of the identified
The bi-weekly meetings are con u nom---.and :will--
continue for the indefinite future. Whether it will
eventually be necessary to remove the Hazardous Materials
Programs from the Health Services Department will depend on
the continued progress which is made in the coming months. It
is important. to note that the Hazardous Materials Programs
need to be coordinated closely with Public Health and the
general Environmental Health Programs.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 2 :
Immediately reassign the Hazardous Materials Division, on an
interim basis, to the Office of the County Administrator pending a
complete. assessment of corrective actions necessary to bring the
County into compliance with AB 2185.
PROPOSED RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications .
B. The County Administrator and Health Services Director will be
responsible for continuing to assess the corrective actions
which are necessary to bring the County into compliance with
AB 2185.
C. It appears that the important objective here is to give the
y identified problems a high priori-ly for resolution,...to develop
a realistic action plan, and then to closely monitor progress
toward achieving the identified objectives . We do not believe
that an immediate organizational reassignment to the County
Administrator's Office is necessary in order to achieve these
objectives. The increased involvement of the County
Administrator through the bi-weekly meetings with Health
Services staff and the on-going involvement of the County
Administrator, who chairs the Hazardous Materials Council, are
believed to be sufficient to insure rapid progress in
resolving the identified problems. We will continue to
evaluate the need for any other organizational changes . We
believe the progress which is being made, as is evidenced by
3
v.
the Plan of Correction, accomplishes the Grand Jury' s
underlying goal .
RECOMMENDATION NO. 3 :
Immediately authorize a new position, Director of Hazardous
Materials, to be funded from AB 2185 revenues and. direct the County
Administrator to fill the position within sixty days of the
authorization. Responsibilities of the Director of Hazardous
Materials should include developing and instituting standard
operating procedures and supervise staff to insure the Hazardous
Materials Division operations comply with all county and state
mandates .
PROPOSED RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted.
B. The Health Services Director will be responsible for the
implementation of this objective. The objective has been
accomplished on an acting basis.
C. The attached comments of the Health Services Director are
incorporated into the response to this recommendation. As Mr.
Finucane notes, Mr. Pascalli has been reassigned to provide
on-site management of Hazardous Materials Programs. The
precise mix of technical and managerial skills which are
required for this position will be reviewed over the next
several months, discussed with staff in the Personnel
Department and appropriate actions will be recommended to the
Board of Supervisors for a permanent classification,
qualifications and salary level. Pending those decisions, and
as can be seen from the Plan of Correction, Mr. Pascalli has
instituted standard operating procedures and is moving forward
in a prompt manner to insure full compliance with all county
and state mandates.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 4:
Concurrently appoint a Hazardous Materials Task Force comprised of
community, business, local government, and fire district
representatives. The Task Force will evaluate organizational
models including, but not limited to, decentralization, integration
within local fire districts of inspection and emergency responses
services as well as privatization of these services.
a. Within 120 days of appointment, the Task Force present its
recommendations for a proposed Area Plan and Inspection Plan
to the Board of Supervisors. Funding required. to support the
Task Force to be paid from AB 2185 revenues..
4
b. Within 30 days of receiving the recommendations of the
Hazardous Materials Task Force, the Board of Supervisoks
approve the updated Area Plan and Inspection Plan and submit
them to the State of California for certification.
PROPOSED RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted with modifications.
B. The Health Services Director will be responsible for insuring
that the Area Plan and Inspection Plan are presented to the
Hazardous Materials Commission for the Commission' s review in
a timely manner.
C. The comments of the Health Services Director are incorporated
into the response to this recommendation. We would refer your
Committee in particular to the attachments to Mr. Finucane' s
report, including the bylaws, guidelines and membership of the
Hazardous Materials Commission, along with the attached letter
from the Chairman of the Commission. We believe that the
Hazardous Materials Commission represents what the Grand Jury
was recommending. The charge to the Commission clearly allows
it to study and recommend the organization placement of
emergency response functions. The Commission has studied and
made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on exactly
these issues.
RECOMMENDATION NO. 5 :
Immediately establish a method for continuous monitoring of the
performance of the Hazardous Materials Division to assure citizens
of compliance with all county and state Hazardous , Materials
mandates.
PROPOSED RESPONSE:
A. This recommendation is accepted.
B. The County Administrator and Health Services Director will be
responsible for continuing to "'.monitor the performance of the
Hazardous Materials Division.
C. The comments of the Health Services Director are. incorporated
into the response to this recommendation. We believe that the
combination of the public discussions of the Hazardous
Materials Commission, the meetings of the Hazardous Materials
Council, the many meetings conducted by the Health Services
Department with the general public, local community groups and
businesses, the oversight of multiple regional, state and
federal agencies and the willingness of the Health Services
Department staff to meet with any and all community groups
should provide multiple forums which can assure the public of
5
i
the Hazardous Materials Division's compliance with all county
and state hazardous materials mandates . The level of
oversight being provided by the County Administrator and
Health Services Director will also provide assurance of this
level of compliance.
We would recommend that your Committee receive aLny comments from
the members of the Grand Jury or staff of the Health Services
Department and then formulate your proposed response to the Grand
Jury which we would suggest you present to the Board of Supervisors
on April 20, 1993 .
PB:amb
_. 9ranj ury..-rea- .-. --.----
cc:
—cc: Health Services Director
County Counsel
1992-93 Grand Jury
6
Contra Costa County
The Board of Supervisors HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
Tom Powers, 1 st District 6Mark Finucane, Director
Jeff Smith,2nd District .............
Gayle Bishop,3rd District
20 Allen Street
Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Martinez,Ca4fornia 94553-3191
Tom Torlakson,5th District
(510)370-5003
FAX(510)370-5098
County Administrator
Phil Batchelor
County Administrator
DATE: April 6, 1993
TO: Phil atchel C72 Administrator
Phil
FROM: Mark in cane, ealtlh Services Director
SUBJECT: April 12 Internal Operations Report regarding Hazardous Materials Program
In its February report, the Grand Jury made 5 recommendations regarding the hazardous
materials program. For the first two,I am providing my views and issues for you to consider
in making your recommendations. For the others, I am providing my recommendations.
1 and 2. Immediately relieve the Health Services Department of responsibility for
implementation of Section 25500 of the H&S Code and reassign the Hazardous Materials
Division,on an interim basis,to the office of the County Administrator,pending a complete
assessment .. of AB 2185.
In close association with the CAO's office, the Health Services Department is conducting
a thorough review and assessment of the AB 2185 inspection program as well as the other
programs we administer. I and my senior management staff,-including Lew Pascalli, who
has been reassigned full-time to oversee this effort, meet every other week with you to
review our progress and discuss any policy issues. (These meetings are in addition to weekly
meetings that I have with my management staff and Dr. Wendel Brunner, Assistant Health
Services Director for Publiz;Health.) I believe that this process ensures sufficient oversight
by the office of the County Administrator without disrupting the ongoing operations of the
program..
When the hazardous materials program was first being developed, there was extensive
discussions about which department should administer the program. The recommendation
from the Hazardous Materials Commission was that the Health Services Department was
the most appropriate department, primarily because it provides the appropriate link to
public health and protection. It is important to keep clearly focused that the reason we are
concerned about hazardous materials is because they are a threat to individual and public
health and the environment, and that the purpose of our programs is not to simply log
inspections but to protect the health of individuals and the community.
Merrithew Memorial Hospital&Clinics Pudic Health - Mental Health - Substance Abuse Emytronrnental Health
Contra Costa Health Plan Emergency Medical Services - Horne Health Agency Geriatrics
A III
The health perspective is essential to providing clear priorities to the hazardous materials
programs. In Contra Costa County, the Risk Management Prevention Program's priorities
were based not only on the .-ngineering complexities of the facilities, but also on the public
health threat to the community. Other inspection and regulatory priorities including
evaluation of hazardous waste sites, toxic waste generators, and storage facilities are also
developed in consultation with public health.
The great threat to community health from hazardous materials comes from accidental
releases into the community. To manage the response to a hazardous materials release, the
Health Services Department maintains a medical health officer on call who is additionally
trained in toxicology and risk assessment or has such consultation immediately available.
The Health Officer on call's responsibility is to assess and prioritize the health risk to the
community and to direct the hazardous materials response to meet those`priorities, working
in conjunction with police, fire, county authorities, and the Health Services Director. It is
essential that in an emergency that there will be clear line of authority and communication
between the Health Officer on call and the hazardous materials response team. This
authority and communication is developed not just by the lines on the organizational chart
but by the ongoing participation in the planning, implementing, and evaluating of hazardous
materials programs as part of an integrated Health Services agency.
I would also note the letter from Paul De Falco, Chair of the Hazardous Materials
Commission with regard to importance of maintaining an integrated approach with a public
health orientation to hazardous materials programs (Attachment A).
3. Immediately authorize a new position, Director of Hazardous Materials, to be funded
from AB 2185 revenues.
Recommendation: Approve. As you know,the Deputy Director of the Hazardous Materials
Division resigned in June 1992. At the time, Dr. Walker and I had concerns about the
organization and administration of the Division. We made a management decision that,
rather than hire a new deputy director, right away Dr. Walker would assume direct
responsibility for the division, thoroughly evaluate its operations, and make necessary
reorganizational changes before determining when to hire a new on-site manager and what
his or her qualifications should be.
Subsequently, we hired as a consultant, then-regional director for the California State
Department of Toxic Substance Control, Howard Hatayama, a highly respected official, to
conduct an assessment of the Division. His evaluation was completed in October. Mr.
Hatayama recommended, among other things, steps to strengthen the team structure over
the next 12 to 18 months. In the long term, he recommended either hiring an on-site
manager or three first line managers to oversee field operations, program development and
office support. I have asked Mr. Hatayama to review our management progress this summer
after our inspections are current and to pay particular attention to the policies and
procedures that we've developed during this time. He is considering our request. As
before, Mr. Hatayama will be free to comment in any way he sees fit. I have attached a
copy of Mr. Hatayama's October report (Attachment B).
3
This consultancy notwithstanding, following the issuance of the Grand Jury report, I
immediately reassigned Lew Pascalli, Safety Officer for the HSD, as the full time on-site
manager of the hazardous materials program on an interim basis. His responsibilities
include overseeing all administration and day-to-day operations and developing and
instituting policies and inspection schedules. At the same time, we are evaluating what
should be the roles,responsibilities and qualifications for a new,permanent on-site manager.
In particular, I am reviewing the appropriate balance between administrative and technical
experience that is necessary to manage the hazardous materials program.
4. Appoint a Hazardous Materials Task Force to evaluate organizational models including
- decentralization, -integration within local fire districts of inspei}ion ,end emergency — -
responses services as well as privatization of these services. The Task Force [should]
present recommendations for a proposed Area Plan and Inspection Plan to the Board of
Supervisors.
Recommendation: Modify. The Hazardous Materials Task Force, as described by the
Grand Jury, is nearly identical to the Hazardous Materials Commission that has been in
place for nearly 7 years. Attached are copies of the Commission's Bylaws, Guidelines and
membership (Attachment Q. The Hazardous Materials Commission membership includes,
among others,representatives of industry,environmental organizations,Mayors'Conference,
the League of Women Voters and the general public.
The Commission received copies of the Grand Jury report and your report to the Board and
discussed the findings at both of its subcommittee meetings. I have made regular updates
to the Commission on the HSD response. The issue raised by the Grand Jury regarding
different organizational models for providing emergency response services is a complex one.
We have outlined in Section F of our action plan a general matrix for incident response that
describes different responses for different types of incidents. This matrix reflects our current
system. At the same time, we are taking this opportunity to review the overall incident
response system for cost-effectiveness and maximal public health and safety protection. We
will present the results of our review to the Hazardous Materials Commission.
With regard to the Area Plan, the Grand Jury noted that the Contra Costa County
Hazardous Materials Area Plan has not been updated since 1988. The State has received
approximately 130 Area Plans from administering agencies throughout the state and has only
reviewed approximately 80. Contra Costa's Area Plan has not been reviewed.
Notwithstanding the above, the County is required by law to "...certify to the office (State)
every three years that it has conducted a complete review of its area plan and has made any
necessary revisions". Therefore,a review of the Area Plan is being conducted. Changes that
have already been made to the Area Plan will be recorded and submitted to the State Office
of Emergency Services by June 30, 1993.
More importantly, however, I want to stress the ongoing efforts, initiated by the HSD, to
4
develop a regional emergency response plan. As was noted in your February 22 report, the
HSD participates in two working groups--the Hazardous Materials Interagency Task Force
and the Regional Hazardous Materials Response Organization — comprised of federal,
state, regional and local agencies and other emergency responders with the goal of
developing the necessary arrangements and relationships for regional emergency response
coordination and preparedness. Copies of the revised Plan will be submitted to these
working groups for comment. Recommended changes reflecting the work of these groups
will be reviewed by the Hazardous Materials Council and Hazardous Materials Commission
prior to being sent to the State OES. Procedures and a timetable will be set in place for
obtaining annual comment and updating the Area Plan as needed.
With regard to the review of different organizational models for providing emergency
response services, I would refer you to the letter from Paul De Falco, Chair of the
Hazardous Materials Commission (Attachment A). If you would like this issue pursued, I
believe that the Commission would present the most appropriate forum for this discussion
to occur.
5. Immediately establish a method for continuous monitoring of the performance of the
Hazardous Materials Division to assure citizens of compliance with all county and state
hazardous materials mandates.
Recommendation: Accept. As I mentioned above, the Hazardous Waste Task Force had
recommended in 1986 that a Hazardous Materials Council, made up of department heads
and chaired by the County Administrator, be established. The Council,which was formed
soon thereafter meets monthly. In addition, I formed an internal Health Services
Department hazardous materials management team, comprised of Dr. Walker, Barbara
Masters, Dr. Brunner and now Lew Pascalli,which meets with me every Monday to review
policy and program issues. Dr. Walker also makes a report every month to the Hazardous
Materials Commission on major policy issues confronting the Hazardous Materials Program.
I also want to point out that although the Hazardous Materials Council and Commission
provide for ongoing review by affected agencies, communities and businesses, the HSD also
convenes meetings with the public,local community groups and businesses to discuss specific
issues as they arise. _
Following the issuance of the Grand Jury report, Dr.Walker, Barbara Masters, Lew Pascalli
and I began meeting every other week with you to monitor and discuss our progress in
implementing changes in the administration of the hazardous materials program. We
provided you with a program implementation plan, which is updated each week. This plan
includes specific action items in response to the 11 issues outlined in your original report
to the Board. The plan is included in Attachment D.
• �-M-Q�Stw�e.t+
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY t4
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION
Paul De Falco,
Chair
April 7, 1993
Phil Batchelor
County Administrator
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, California 94553-1286
Dear Mr. Batchelor,
I am writing to let you know of the deliberations of the Hazardous Materials
Commission regarding the February Grand Jury Report. I asked that each
Committee of the Commission discuss the policy issues raised by the report,
focusing on questions regarding whether there are any conflicts or holes in the
programs and whether the priorities between the programs are appropriate.
I wanted to share some of the comments made by Commissioners prior to the
Board's Internal Operations Committee meeting as well as to provide some
historical information about the Commission's and its predecessor, the
Hazardous Waste Task Force's previous recommendations on some of these
issues.
First, most Commission members believed that issues regarding public
participation are of the highest priority. Many representatives of the public
do not know or understand the programs in place regarding hazardous
materials and wastes or know how to access information. The Commission
will be reviewing the public participation aspects of hazardous materials
programs and will make recommendations to the CAO and the Board of
Supervisors regarding how to improve public outreach and understanding.
Second, I have noted the recommendation from the Grand Jury report
c regarding reassigning the hazardous materials program to the CAO's"office.
_ The location of the prog*a-p_was_.Oiscvsced by the Hai<ardous Waste Task
Force during its deliberations in 1986. At that time, it recommended that the
Health Services Department be the lead agency to manage the hazardous
materials and waste programs. It also recommended supporting the
Emergency Response Team in the HSD. We believed then that an integrated
approach to inspections and emergency response and a public health
perspective were important considerations for the department that administers
these programs.
At the same time, the Task Force recognized the need for oversight by the
CAO and the public of these programs and, therefore, recommended the
Contra Costa County Health Services Department,20 Allen Street, Martinez, CA 94553 (510)370-5022, FAX(510)370.5098
-2-
formation of a Hazardous Materials Council,made up of Department Heads
and chaired by the County Administrator; as well as a Hazardous Materials
Commission made up of public members. The Council was to provide
coordination between the different county departments, such as HSD,
Community Development,Office of Emergency Services and the Fire Chiefs
Association as well as oversight of the working prolpams.
From the discussions held by the two Subeommillees, I believe that the
CommWon feels this arrangement is still the most appropriate division of
responsibilities. Many Commissioners expressed aaipport for keeping the
programs within the health department because -the Integrated program
approach is the most effective way to limit c)Wo-we-wi toxicity of materials- -to the general pyblic. Tie Commission receives monthly reports from the
Assistant County Administrator regarding the Cotmcil meetings, and the
coordination and oversight process appears to be worldng satisfactorily.
With regard to the Grand Jury's concerns about emergency response and
recommendation that "a Hazardous Materials Task Force evaluate
organizational models Including, but not limited to decentralization,
integration within local fire districts of inspection and emergency responses
services as well as privatization of these services,' I would note that Fire is
currently the primary responder to accidents and the HSD Haz Mat
Emergency Response team responds only when there is a specific hazardous
materials threat.
I hope these comments are helpful. I want to stress that although I have tried
to convey comments made by many Commissioners,the contents of this letter
have not been discussed with the Commission as a whole.
Sincerely,
. -� A
aul De Falco
air -
cc: Hazardous Materials Commission
Avp_�
A MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HAZMAT PROGRAM
Howard K. Hatayama
October, 1992
OBJECTIVES OF THE REVIEW
The primary objectives of the review were as follows: 1) To examine
-- te working relationships among -t si-aff -of =the-= Dviscora=to
determine what changes can be made to improve the effectiveness of
the office, 2) To determine what would be the most appropriate kind
of organizational structure for the short and long term, and 3) To
assess the relative priorities of the various work performed by the
technical staff with regard to public health protection and
accomplishing the mission of the Division.
METHODS OF REVIEW
This review was conducted primarily by interviewing staff of the
Division and by observing interactions during team meetings.
Interviews were conducted during team meetings, in small group
sessions, and during individual sessions. In an effort to create as
much openness as possible and to encourage as much candor as
possible, time slots were made available for groups and individuals
to sign-up.
Typical questions asked during the interviews included: 1) How do
you view the interface between your self/team and other teams? 2)
What is the relationship like between the technical staff and the
1
office support staff? 3) What type of organizational structure
would work best for you? 4) How is the current structure working?
5) What in your day to day work do you see that needs more
attention from the County because of the potential risks involved?
6) What in your day to day work appears to be an inappropriate use
of resources due to the low or negligible risks involved in the
activity being monitored? Many other follow-up questions were asked
depending on the responses and direction of the inquiry. But in
all cases, the problem or issue identification discussion was
followed by a discussion of how they could be resolved or of
improvements which could be made.
FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS
Rather than providing a laundry list of findings and observations,
the following represents a condensation and integration of the many
comments and suggestions made during interviews.
Technical and Office Suppport Interface
On the whole, the technical and office support staff seem to be
very motivated to do a good jbb and to improve the effectiveness of
the office. The technical staff seem to understand. the work and
are very interested in doing their jobs well. The committment of
the office support staff to facilitating the work of the technical
staff, meeting the needs of the members of the public that walk in
the front door, keeping the office running, and putting the best
2
face on the County is very remarkable.
Relationships vary widely between office support and technical
staff. Some are good enough to enable one-on-one problem solving.
On the other extreme, some have deteriorated to the point where
very emotional outbreaks have occurred. There seems to be a high
degree of distrust and disrespect -among a few individuals that
colors the relationship of the groups. These feelings seem to
arise from a number of areas including past loyalties, perceived
encroachment by office support staff upon the domain of the
technical staff, a perception that the clerical staff are
attempting to hold some technical staff accountable for certain
work, and a perception that some staff on both sides are not
performing their work up to the expectations. Some of this can
also be traced to the traditional technical/office support
heirarchy where the technical staff are usually higher on the
pecking order and in this situation feel that they can invade
personal space, be verbally abusive and expect to be waited upon
for such things as keeping the office clean and presentable. The
office support staff acknowledge the hierarchy and really want to
be part of the team, but also want to be treated as people.
A number of arrangements are already in place to improve this
relationship including the attendance of office support staff at
some staff meetings, providing for office support staff to focus on
the work of a particular technical team while cross-training on
3
other duties and identifying an effective team leader for the
office staff. One of the most important changer that can greatly
enhance the working relationships would be to establish a formal
supervisory position for the office staff. As a formal supervisor,
this person would have the stature and authority to effectively
monitor the work being done by the office staff, prioritize the
work coming in from technical staff, establish and implement
policies and procedures as they relate to the office. staff,
negotiate with the technical staff, protect the office staff more
effectively, advocate more effectively for the rights of the office
staff, and provide one point of accountability that the technical
staff can turn to when needed. Along with appointing a supervisor,
it is necessary to establish a clearly defined problem
solving/dispute resolution mechanism that everyone understands and
that is used frequently and routinely. This mechanism may
ultimately evolve into a planning session for the office which
would be a very positive development.
To increase the level of mutual respect, it may help to formalize
more social interactions between the groups in the office. Such
functions as acknowledging special days, -having staff meetings
around pot-luck lunches, or other functions that are aimed at
breaking down barriers and helping people see beyond the office
heirarchy.
The Technical Teams and Team Leader Concept
4
The teams as currently structured seem to be appropriately
delineated based on the different types of responsibilities of the
office and the availability of managment resources. To the extent
that the team leaders are more peers than supervisors, many staff
seem to like the arrangement. They welcome the opportunity to
interact on a more collegial level without the close oversight that
a formal supervisor might bring to the situation. This arrangement
seems to work very well for many of the staff because they are
self-starters and because most of the groups work well together.
They do acknowledge however that there are situations where the
team leader needs the authority of a formal supervisor to ensure
accountability and resolve disputes.
There is some confusion about the roles and responsibilities of the
team leaders in this arena. This confusion stems from team members
not having a clear understanding of what authority the team leaders
have and where the authority of the leaders begins and ends. It is
not certain whether the team leaders themselves have a clear and
consistent understanding of their roles and responsibilities
related to holding people accountable for work, identifying and
correcting inappropriate behavior, planning; prioritizing and
organizing the work. This misunderstanding could leave the door
open for the few people who choose to, to take advantage of the
situation by challenging the limits of the team leaders. Because
of their peer relationship, the team leaders would understandably
be hesitant to proactively pursue corrective action or problem
5
solving where necessary.
A number of steps can be taken to improve the effectiveness of the
team leader concept and sustain it over a significant period of
time (12-18 months) . One of the first is to delineate in as much
detail as appropriate the responsibilities and limits of authority
of the team leaders. Writing this down and discussing it .with the
staff will go a long way towards ensuring a common understanding.
This will also enhance the system now in place that relies on peer
pressure and public accountability for the volume of work outputs
(inspections) if the team leaders are responsible for reviewing the
quality of the outputs.
Another step is to help the team leaders develop their managerial
skills and enhance their leadership abilities by providing training
in areas such as effective listening, dealing with difficult
people, meeting facilitation and basic supervision where planning
and organizing is covered. This kind of training will help to
develop leadership by improving and focusing interpersonal skills
in the workplace setting. It will enhance their ability to hear
what the needs and concerns of other staff are and to respond µ
appropriately. It's to be expected that some team leaders are
more skilled than others in these areas. But having all the team
leaders participate in the same training sessions will have added
benefits of developing team work, establishing a common vocabulary
and establishing a common .framework for performing their team
6
leader work.
To further enhance the stature and leadership abilities of the team
leaders, it would be very advantageous to include them more in the
prioritizing and policy setting functions. In doing so, they will
feel more connected to the Director's office, better understand its
dynamics, and will develop their ability to better prioritize the
many "top priorities" that occur. They will also have more
opportunitites and develop a better understanding of when to seek
guidance from the Director's office on work priorities.
In summary, the present organizational structure can work well in
the short term with the following: 1) More specific written
descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of the team leaders,
2) Some management training for the team leaders, and 3) More
participation of the team leaders in prioritizing work and policy
development.
Long Term Organizational Strategy
Ii is clear that an on-site manager will be needed ultimately _�_o
run the office for a number of reasons. In order to make the
effort worthwhile for the team leaders, there needs to be some
tangible compensation or a career path for advancement. Managing
five groups from a remote location will ultimately prove very
difficult because of the volume and variety of work involved, the
7
sensitivity of the work, the need to maintain accountability on a
day to day basis, and the need to establish and maintain an
effective team involving all members of the office. Currently,
there is much support among the staff for the Director's office
because of the level of interest and feedback that the staff gets.
It is extremely important to maintain this level of contact but
over time the ability to provide this level of attention may be
eroded by other priorities. An on-site manager can provide this
vital link. The team leader concept can still remain in effect and
may evolve into rotational assignments for purposes of
professional development.
Another option for the long term is to consolidate the staff into
essentially three units and establish formal first line manager
positions for these groups. The three units could be: 1) Office
support, 2) Field operations including all inspections, emergency
response, and remediation, and 3) Program development and support
which would include risk management and prevention, waste
minization, hazardous materials commission interface and support,
and other program related functions that arenot field work
oriented. This approach would prol-ide a structure that would help
focus the field work and provide for the maximum opportunity to
conduct inspections in an integrated fashion. It would also
provide the opportunity to prioritize the field work in a more
effective manner because there would be one manager responsible.
The program development unit can be the focal point for policy and
8
procedure development, interface with the various community and
political constituents of the program, hazardous materials
planning, administrative issues like billing, public education,
etc. Another advantage of this approach is that the unit managers
can have different backgrounds and strengths such as more
technically oriented for the field operations unit and more
politically and administratively oriented for the program
developmet group. The key to the success of this kind of approach
is the ability of the three unit managers to work together so as to
minimize the need for day to day involvement by the Director's
office. With this in mind during the recruitment and selection
process and with this being a critical performance criterion for
the positions, this approach is a very viable alternative to having
one on-site manager.
Other Issues Needing Attention
There is an immediate need to focus on ensuring that the bills that
are generated from the office are accurate. There is concern on the
part of the staff that the information used to generate bills is
not up tos�date and as -a- result inaccurate bills may be going out to la
tank owners and others subject to the County HazMat fees. The
administrative work that will be necessary to correct these bills
after they have been sent will far outweigh the work necessary to
verify their accuracy before hand.
9
Maintenance of the administrative records (files) is a topic of
much discussion in the office. There seems to be a system in place
that is relatively straightforward and can work well. However
there are varying degrees of adherence to the established
procedures such as use of the check-out cards. Before moving to a
more rigid system, it would be more appropriate to reinforce the
use of the current system. Furthermore, it may greatly improve the
-accuracy of the-records if the respdhbility for maintaining up-to-
date records is clearly defined. The benefits of improving the
accuracy of the administrative records are a more accurate billing,
better service to members of the public and the business community
who come in to view the files, and a more organized and efficient
office. A similar approach can be taken with the data management
systems that are in place in terms of determining whether they are
adequate as designed and only need to be used.
Prioritization of Resources
There was some discussion about how the County HazMat resources
might be better allocated to address the health and environmental
,xisks as they perceive them. However the organizational issues
noted above dominated the discussions and time constraints
precluded further development of this issue.
10
�-�iCti merrf- �-
BYLAWS OF THE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION
I . RESPONSIBILITIES.
A. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 25135 . 2, the
Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission ( "Commission" )
shall:
1 . Advise the County Board of Supervisors, County
staff, and the mayors, council members, and staffs of the cities
within the county, on issues related to the development,
approval, and administration of_th. county hazardous waste
management plan.
2. Hold informal public meetings and workshops to
provide the `public with information, and to receive comments,
during the preparation of the county hazardous waste management
plan.
B. Pursuant to Board of Supervisors Order dated October 14,
1986, the Commission is charged with the following tasks:
1. Draft a County Hazardous Materials Storage and
Transportation Plan for consideration by the Board of
Supervisors.
2. Draft a County Hazardous Materials Storage and
Transportation Management Ordinance for consideration by the
Board of Supervisors .
3 . Coordinate the implementation of the Hazardous
Materials Release Response Plan and Inventory program (AB 2185)
(Stats . 1985, ch. 1184) with the other recommendations of the
Hazardous Waste Task Force .and the Hazardous Waste Management
Plan. (Revised by Commission, April 22, 1992)
4 . Addressthe economic effects of implementing these
recommendations.
5 . Further develop the recommendations involving
hazardous materials issues which should include obtaining broad
public input.
6 . Oversee management coordination of all aspects of
the storage or transportation of hazardous materials and the
generation, storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal of
hazardous waste.
7 . Recommend further charges for consideration by the
Board of Supervisors, or recommend changes in the existing
charges to the Commission for consideration by the Board of
Supervisors .
1
Hazardous Materials Commission
Bylaws, April 22, 1992
C. Report and make recommendations on such further matters
concerning hazardous materials and wastes as are referred to the
Commission by the Board of Supervisors .
II . MEMBERSHIP
A. Members. The Commission shall consist of the following
fifteen (15) members, aE;painted a;a follows_:_.
Two members of the Board of Supervisors, appointed by
the Board of Supervisors;
Three representatives of cities, appointed by the City
Selection Committee pursuant to Article 11 (§ 50270 et seq. ) of
Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division I of Title 5 of the Government
Code. (Preferably, there will be one official representing East
County cities, one official representing Central County cities,
and one official representing West County cities . ) ;
Two representatives of business, nominated by
industrial associations, screened by the Internal Operations
Committee, and appointed by the Board of Supervisors;
Two representatives of environmental organizations,
nominated by those organizations, screened by the Internal
Operations Committee, and appointed by the Board -of Supervisors;
One representative of the Integrated Waste Management
Task Force, nominated by the Task Force and appointed by the
Board of Supervisors (Revised by Commission, April 22, 1992) ;
One representative of taxpayers, recommended by the
Internal Operations Committee and appointed by the Board of
Supervisors;
One representative of the League of Women Voters,
nominated by the League and appointed by the Board of
Supervisors;
One labor representative, nominated by :Labor
organizations, screened by the Internal Operations Committee, and
appointed by the Board of Supervisors;
One representative of environmental engineering firms
located in Contra Costa County, nominated by such firms, screened
by the Internal Operations Committee, and appointed by the Board
of Supervisors;
2
Hazardous Materials Commission
Bylaws , April 22, 1992
One representative of the general public, appointed by
the Board of Supervisors . (Health & Saf . Code, § 25135. 2; Bd.
Order dated 10-14-86 . )
B. Board Appointments . Board of Supervisors' Resolution
No. 77/273 shall govern the procedure for nominating and
appointing members appointed by the Board of Supervisors .
- C_, Terms. _ __Memb9rs__sha.1.l serve staggered terms o.f- four-=--x
years . at the pleasure of the appointing authority. There is no
limit to the number of terms a member may serve. The Commission
shall determine how the terms shall be staggered.
- D. Alternates . Organizations nominating or appointing
members to serve on the Commission may designate alternates to
members of the Commission by submitting the name of the alternate
to the County Administrator. If the Board of Supervisors is the
appointing authority, the County Administrator shall seek Board
approval of the appointment, which becomes effective upon Board
approval . (Bd. Order dated 8-18-87 . )
III . OFFICERS
A. The Commission shall elect a Chairperson and a Vice-
chairperson for terms of one calendar year.
B. The Clerk of the Board shall be notified of the
selection of the Chairperson and Vice-chairperson.
C. The Chairperson and Vice-chairperson may serve
consecutive terms .
IV. CONDUCT OF BUSINESS
A. Meetings . Meetings shall be conducted pursuant to the _
Ralph `14. Brown Act. (Gov. Code, § 54950 et seq. ) _
B. Chairperson. The chairperson shall be responsible for:
1 . Conducting all meetings of the Commission.
2. Reviewing and approving Commission agendas .
'3 . Selecting Commission members for standing and ad
hoc committees .
3
Hazardous Materials Commission
Bylaws, April 22, 1992
4 . Representing the Commission, or designating a
member to represent the. Commission, before the Board of
Supervisors, City Councils, or other bodies before which the
Commission may wish to appear.
C. Ouorum. Business shall be conducted by the Commission
only when a quorum is present. A majority shall constitute a
quorum. During periods when one or more seats on the Hazardous
Materials Commission is— ant,, the vacan-t positions shall not be
-- -considered for determining whether a quorum is present: A-seat — -
is vacant when there is no commissioner or alternate appointed to
serve in that capacity.
D. Final recommendations of the Commission to the Board of
Supervisors shall require eight (8) affirmative votes .
V. BYLAWS AND OTHER GUIDELINES
A. Bylaws . These Bylaws shall govern the conduct and
activities of the Commission. However, nothing in these bylaws
excuses compliance with any other law. The Commission may, from
time to time, recommend to the Board of Supervisors that changes
be made to these bylaws .
B. Other Guidelines . The Commission may establish other
guidelines for the efficient conduct of its business not
inconsistent with these bylaws .
VI . CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
A. General Board Policy. Pursuant to Resolution No.
82/574, the Board of Supervisors has adopted a policy for Board
appointees concerning conflicts of interest. Resolution No.
82/574 applies to the Commission and requires as follows:
1 . Statutes on Conflicts . Officials, commissioners,
and Committee members appointed by the Board shall adhere to the
principles and rules of the Political Reform Act of 1974 (Gov.
Code, § 816000 et seq. ) , including the following:
(a) Local government should serve the needs and
respond to the wishes of all citizens equally, without regard to
their wealth. (Gov. Code, § 81001[b] . )
(b) Public officials should perform their duties
in an impartial manner, free from bias caused by financial
interests of themselves or their supporters . (Gov. Code,
§ 81002[b] . )
4
Hazardous Materials Commission
Bylaws, April 22 , 1992
(c) Public officials should disclose assets and
income which may be materially affected by their official
actions, and in appropriate circumstances they should be
disqualified from acting, in order to avoid conflicts of
interest. (Gov. Code, § 81002[d] . )
2. Common Law Policy on Conflicts . All officials
should so conduct the public business as to avoid even any
appearance of conflict of interest ( tee, c,g. ,
Roberts [ 1979] "89 CaI�pp. 3d 871 . )
B. Board Policy for Hazardous Materials Commission.
Consistent with Resolution No. 82/574 and Health and Safety Code
section 25135. 2, the Board hereby declares, as a matter of
legislative determination, that members of the Hazardous
Materials Commission are intended to represent and further the
interest of specified industries and groups responsible for their
nomination. Accordingly, the Board of Supervisors hereby finds
that for purposes of members of the Commission nominated by a
trade, industrial or professional group, such trade, industrial
or professional group constitutes a significant segment of the
public within the meaning of Government Code section 87103.
By this policy, the Board does not find or imply that
members of the Hazardous Materials Commission are public
officials within the meaning of Government Code section 87100
(Political Reform Act) . This declaration of policy is only to
clarify the application of the Board' s general policy on conflict
of interest to the Hazardous Materials Commission.
(Approved by the Board on 10-16-89 .
Non-substantive amendments by the
Commission on April 22, 1992 . )
LTF:ct
ct2a.,\bylaws.hmc
1tf3hmcby.one
5
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION
GUIDELINES FOR THE CONDUCT OF BUSINESS
(As Amended on April 22 , 1992)
I . MEMBERSHIP & ATTENDANCE
A. Staggered Terms . Pursuant to the Bylaws, members shall
serve staggered four-year terms . In order to implement the
requirement for staggered terms, the Hazardous Materials
Commission hereby determines, on August 23, 1989, that the
current . terms of the following members (by category) shall
terminate on the +ft6icat-ed dates:
1 . Members whose terms shall terminate on December 31,
1990:
a. City Representative No. 1
b. Board of Supervisors Representative No. 1
C. Representative of General Public
2 . Members whose terms shall terminate on December 31,
1991 :
a. City Representative No. 2
b. Business Representative No. 1
C. Environmental Organization Representative No. 1
d. Labor Representative
3 . Members whose terms shall terminate on December 31,
1992 :
a. Integrated Waste Management Task Force
Representative
b. Board of Supervisors Representative No. 2
C. League of Women Voters Representative
d. Representative of taxpayers
4 . Members whose terms shall terminate in December 31,
1993 :
a. City Representative No. 3
b. Business Representative No. 2
C. Environmental Representative No. 2
d. Environmental Engineering Firm Representative
B. The Commission considers it imperative that members who
vote on matters before the Commission are informed and
knowledgeable as to such matters. Therefore if a member fails to
attend three consecutive meetings, such member will be ineligible
to vote at the next meeting attended. Attendance by an alternate
constitutes attendance by the member. This three-meeting rule
-1-
Hazardous Materials Commission
Guidelines (4-22-92 )
applies even if the Commission schedules three meetings one week
apart from each other.
C. If an alternate has been appointed for a member, and if
neither the member nor alternate are present for four consecutive
meetings, the organization nominating the member will be asked to
replace the member and/or alternate.
D. New members shall be added to the Commission with
associate, non-voting status upon determination by the Commission
that an additional point of. _vt-mow_ i necessary. The Conrtsssion --
shall consider the need upon request by a group or individual or
if initiated by a Commissioner.
E. A representative of a sewering agency is an associate,
non-voting member of the Commission. The term of said
representative shall expire on December 31, 1990. Subsequent
representatives shall serve 4-year terms .
II . BOARD AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COUNCIL REFERRALS
A. The Commission shall respond to Board and Council
referrals by providing appropriate policy and technical
recommendations .
B. Referrals that are received seven days or more before
the Committee meeting will go to the Committee, with the Chair
entertaining motions for appropriate referrals . Each Committee's
agenda will list the referrals and the action expected.
C. If an item is referred to the Commission for comment,
appropriate staff input will be sought as part of the
Commission's deliberation process .
III . COMMITTEES
A. There shall be 2 committees: Planning and Policy
Development, and Operations .
B. The Committees shall function in an advisory role to the
Commission and shall not replace the direct responsibility of the
Commission to the Board of Supervisors or its relationship to the
Hazardous Materials Council.
C. A Mayors' Conference representative shall serve on each
Committee.
-2-
A
Haz,ardous Materials Commission
Guidelines (4-22-92 )
D. The Chair and Vice-Chair of the Commission shall serve
on different Committees .
E. Guidelines to the Committees:
1 . Committees are responsible for their meeting dates,
times and agendas . Meetings shall be open and public.
Committees shall determine the minimum number of members for a
quorum.
2-: Bdard referrals shall be reviewed &nd r-etur-r3e.d=to
4 the Commission at its next meeting with a recommendation for
action.
3 . Committees will attempt to complete. all assigned
committee work prior to the next Commission meeting to prevent a
backlog. The Committees shall give a status report at every
Commission meeting.
4 . To expedite Commission meetings, Committee Chairs
shall report only on action items . Such reports will include the
Committee's recommendation, pros and cons, and the specific
request for action. Committee Chairs are responsible for
ensuring that action items are on the Commission .Agenda.
5 . Committee meetings shall be regarded as "workshops"
designed to elicit public participation. Each Committee Chair is
responsible for ensuring that notices of the Committee meetings
are sent to the appropriate parties . However, use of Committee
meetings as a forum for public input does not preclude formal
Commission public meetings .
6 . Each Committee shall annually review its Mission
Statement and accompanying work plan and time schedule. Changes
in the Mission Statement, work plan or time schedule shall be
brought to the attention of the Commission.
7 . The Chair of each Committee will meet monthly with
the Chairman of the Commission to clarify the respective
responsibilities of each Committee.
F. Planning and Policy Development Committee
1 . The Planning and Policy Development Committee's
responsibility is to address the updating of the County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan, adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Article 3 . 5 (§ 25135 et seq. ) , and other hazardous waste
management and planning issues, including, but notlimited to,
transportation and treatment, storage and disposal (TSD)
-3-
Hazardous Materials Commission
Guidelines (4-22-92)
facilities issues .
2. Planning and Policy Development Committee - Mission
Statement
a) Provide guidance to the Contra Costa Hazardous
Materials Commission in planning, developing, organizing and
scheduling responsible and effective plans for the management of
hazardous materials, including hazardous wastes, within Contra
Costa County. Such guidance shall generally be provided to the
Gomaiissi n --in- -tiie forin---df--recommendations and shall include -
things as technical considerations, effects on the environment,
land use planning, impacts on the community and costs of
implementation.
b) Act as lead committee for input on appropriate
issues to the Commission, e.g. , implementation of the County
Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
c) Serve the Commission as a technical resource
in assessing hazardous materials technologies, management
methodologies, policies and facilities .
G. Operations Committee
1 . The Operations Committee's responsibility is to
address oversight and review for County department programs, new
programs and procedures being proposed, organizational
structures , fee structures, and other management issues that may
arise. The Committee is also responsible for addressing public
education and plans that require communication, such as business
plans, right-to-know issues, household hazardous waste, and other
communication issues that may arise.
2 . Legislation should be referred to the Operations
Committee.
3 . Any future proposed exemptions regarding the
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plan and Inventory Program
( "AB 2185" ) will be reviewed by the Operations Committee.
4 . Operations Committee -- Mission Statement
a) Review and comment on the implementation of
the Hazardous Waste Management Plan recommendations .
b) Review and comment on implementation of state
programs administered at the county level, with primary emphasis
on new programs or those which present a specific problem needing
-4-
Hazardous Materials Commission
Guidelines (4-22-92)
resolution.
c) Review and comment on agency coordination, as
presented in the matrix produced by the Hazardous Materials
Council, especially problem areas .
d) Review and where appropriate recommend
positions on pending state legislation, focusing on those bills
identified by the Hazardous Materials Council or by members of
the Hazardous Materials Commission as being important to the
county. --- - — — - _ -
e) Oversee organizational issues for the
Commission, including recommendation of a work plan and
timetable.
f) Review and assist the County's public outreach
and communication efforts regarding hazardous materials issues .
(August 23, 1991 )
(April 22, 1992)
LTF:ct
ct5a:\hmc.ltf
1tf3hmcgde.two
-5-
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT m-e�
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
PLAN OF CORRECTION -SUMMARY SHEET
i
PLANNED
COMPLETION DATE
DATE COMPLETED
ISSUES:
A. Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business
plans with the County have not kept pace with the goal set forth in
State Law. 6-30-93
-8. There appears to be nd iuecaanism in place to establish priorities forthe order in which facilities will be inspected 4=30-93' -
C. There are no established and generally understood standards for the
number or type of inspections which should be conducted by a staff
member during the year. 8-30-93
D. The anticipated data management system required by State Law is not 8-31-93
yet in place.
E. The Hazardous Materials Program of the Health Services Department
has not, itself,filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although 4-30-93
it is generally agreed that one should have been filed.
1e. No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they
should respond to a hazardous materials incident, leaving to their
individual judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any 4-30-93
given call.
G. Incident Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
involved staff without regard for whether the change might extend
response times because no member of the alert team would be in close
proximity to the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle. 4-30-93
H. Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few years,leading in some cases to complaints regarding the need to
hold other emergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response from the
Hazardous Materials Incident Response Team. 5-:131-9 3
I. The Area Plan has not been updated as is required by State Law. 6-30-93
J. Clerical staff working in the Hazardous Materials Program have apparently
not been provided the information which is required by State Law and
which was indicated in the Department's own internal documents as being
a part of the Hazard Communication Plan. 3-9-93 3-9-93
K Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern for the
Hazardous Materials Program. 4-30-93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT OF 2185 FACILITIES
ISSUE A:
Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business plans with
the County have not kept pace with the goal set forth in State Law.
STATUS:
Final draft of inspection priorities being reviewed. Inspections begun and
being followed.
PLAN:
Receive final draft comments, resolve issues, publish final policy, continue
tracking inspections. Gas station AB 2185 inspections scheduled to be drafted
by 30 June 93.
Of the 503 sites identified as high priority sites needing inspections,
remain to be done.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Andy Parsons
APPROVED BY:
Lew Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report #_5 Dated.: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS ,
ISSUE REPORT OF 2185 FACILITIES
ISSUE :
Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business plans with
the County have not kept pace with the goal set forth in State Law.
TA
Inspection schedules distributed to district. Sites allocated to inspectors.
Site inspectors begin interim "focus survey"/'blitz". Priorities are:
■ Sites following a significant incident involving a release
of a hazardous material causing damage to the health and
safety of the community or the environment.
■ RMPP sites or sites handling or storing Acutely Hazardous
Materials.
■ Referrals from othe regulatory agencies.
■ Referrals from local fire or police agencies.
■ Complaints filed by an individual.
■ New Business Plans presenting substantial errors, omissions or
inventory inconsistencies.
■ Sites requiring followup inspections.
■ Sites due for their three (3) year inspection.
PLAN:
Continue tracking inspections. Work on final policy draft of priorities.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Andy Parsons
APPROVED BY:
Lew Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
..
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT OF 2185 FACILITIES
ISSUE A:
Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business plans with
the County have not kept pace with-the goal set forth in State Law. _.
STATUS:
The RMPP sites to be inspected in the next 90 days total 87. These are split
among the fire districts giving each district 17 to 18 sites. The total
number of sites to be inspected are divided equally among the districts at
approximately 97 each.
Of the 503 sites identified as needing inspections, remain to be done.
PLAN:
Assess the time required for the RMPP sites. Track the inspections remaining
by district and inform the district teams.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Andy Parsons -
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report #_L Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT OF 2185 FACILITIES
ISSUE A:
Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business plans with
the County have not kept pace-with the goal set forth in State Law.
STATUS:
The AB 2185 inspections to be done list, which include RMPP sites have been
given to the five (5) district teams for review as to which have already been -
done and which need to be reallocated to balance the workload to approximately
100 per district. To date, inspections have been done; i.e., entered
into the data base.
PLAN:
Focused ongoing inspections are continuing. The tracking of inspections done
each week by districts will be done and communicated to all concerned. The gas
stations are up substantially to date. Those coming due in the next 90 days
will be postponed until after the focused inspections are made.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY: -
Lew Pascalli/districts
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT OF 2185 FACILITIES
ISSUE A:
Inspections of known AB 2185 facilities which have filed business plans with
the County have not kept pace with the goal set forth in State Law: _
STATUS:
Of the 1,256 businesses requiring on-site inspections at least once every three
years, 352 (26%) to 797 (63%) have been done to date. A priority has been set
to do all due inspections on businesses not done by Richmond Fire Department
or West County Fire and not gas stations.
PLAN:
Excluding gas stations and sites inspected by Richmond Fire Department and West
County Fire, 503 sites have been identified by Hazardous Materials Programs
Districts as needing inspection. The next 90 days, priority will be given to blitz
these inspections with available resources. By 30 Jun 93, HaMat.Programs
will be in compliance with State Law save gas stations needed to be reviewed
Apr, May, Jun 93.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Team Coordinators/District Teams
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON INSPECTION PRIORITY MECHANISM
ISSUE B:
There appears to be no mechanism in place to establish priorities
for the order in which facilities will be inspected.
STATUS:
Inspection priorities final draft policy distributed and being
reviewed by all teams.
PLAN:
Receive comments, resolve conflicts, publish.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Bruce Benike - Underground Tank Program
Steve Morioka - Hazardous Waste Generator Program
Andy Parsons - AB 2185 Program
Sandy Hollenbeck - RMPP
APPROVED BY:
Lew Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON INSPECTION PRIORITY MECHANISM
ISSUE B:
There appears to be no mechanism in place to establish priorities
for the order in which facilities will be inspected.
STATUS:
Comments received back. Priorities for AB 2185 and RMPP changed.
PLAN:
Review proposed changes with AB 2185 and RMPP group.
! RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Bruce Benike - Underground Tank Program
Steve Morioka - Hazardous Waste Generator Program
Andy Parsons - AB 2185 Program
Sandy Hollenbeck - RMPP
APPROVED BY:
Lew Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON INSPECTION PRIORITY MECHANISM
ISSUE B:
There appears.to be no mechanis.-nin_place to es±ablisl-priorities
for the order in which facilities will-be inspected.
STATUS:
Inspection priorities. Policy roughed and distributed to the four (4)
Program Coordinators for review with their teams.
PLAN:
Initial review report from the Program Coordinators due at Program
Coordinator's Meeting on 24 Mar 93.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Bruce Benike - Underground Tank Program
Steve Morioka - Hazardous Waste Gener=ator Program
Andy Parsons - AB 2185 Program
Sandy Hollenbeck - RMPP
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19/93
------------
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON INSPECTION PRIORITY MECHANISM
ISSUE B:
There appears to be no mechanism in place to establish priorities
for the order in which facilities will-be inspected. -
STATUS:
Working with staff to set up existing priorities in a policy statement
priority for review. Have reviewed RMPP, underground tank (UGT) and
AB 2185 program and requested documented or operational standards to
prioritize.
PLAN:
Complete review of remaining program of HazMat Generators. Review Law
and regulations. Rough policy, review with programs and write policy.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lew G. Pascalli/Team Coordinators
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS '
ISSUE REPORT ON INSPECTION PRIORITY MECHANISM
ISSUE B:
There appears to be no mechanism in place to establish priorities
for the order in which facilities will be inspected.=
STATUS:
One program (RMPP) has a rating system of risk. There are no
readily identified rating systems for establishing the relative risk
of AHM a business has to the community.
PLAN:
Each program will establish as policy, a risk standard by which inspection priorities
will be set.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Team Coordinators
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
i ISSUE REPORT ON INSPECTION STANDARDS
ISSUE
There are no established and generally understood standards for the number
or type of inspections which should be conducted by a staff member during the
year.
STATUS:
Mel Knight, Director of Sacramento County HazMat Division to visit and review
program and responses to Grand Jury Report. Will meet with Mark Finucane,
Williiam Walker, Wendel Brunner, Barbara Masters and Phal Batchelor.
PLAN:
More calls made to Erwin Koehler, Santa Clara HazMat and Bill Lent, San Mateo
County HazMat. Followup with telephone review or on-site visit.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Aug 93
Report #_L Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
{
ISSUE REPORT ON INSPECTION STANDARDS
ISSUE C:
There are no established and generally understood standards for the number
or :)-re of in whieb ddb onducted by a staff member during the
year.
TS ATUS:
Contact made with Mel Knight of Sacramento Co. to visit on 5 Mar 93 to
discuss issues including this one.
PLAN:
1. Confirm meeting with Mel Knight and HazMat Management Group on 5 Apr 93 p.m.
to discuss issues. Schedule meetings with teams mid Apr 93 to discuss.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Aug 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t ISSUE REPORT ON INSPECTION STANDARDS
SI SUE C:
There are no established and generally understood standards for the number
or type of inspections which should-be conducte&by a sta f--mumber-during the
year.
STATUS:
Meetings to be scheduled with teams during the middle of ,Apr 93. The Program/
District matrix is focused on as being the model to implement geo/program
inspection standards.
t PLAN:
Meet with teams, Dr. Walker and personnel to discuss issues involved. Set up
meetings with other HazMat groups to get their information.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Aug 93
Report #_L Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON INSPECTION STANDARDS
ISSUE C:
There are no established and generally understood standards for the number
---=_ cr1 type of inspections =t
. ihich-should be conducted by a staff member during - 4
year.
STATUS:
Meetings planned with the program teams of the organization to review methods
of prioritizing, scheduling and assuring compliance with State law of
inspections to be done.
PLAN:
Set up meetings with teams. Discuss with other bay area HazMat groups doing
inspections. Review district org. concept as instrument to insure compliance
with State mandates.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr./Team Coordinators
DUE DATE:
30 Aug 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON INSPECTION STANDARDS
ISSUE C:
There are no established and generally understood standards for the number
or type of inspections whi_cb_shoidd be conducted by a_stafi'_member during the
year.
STATUS:
This is still in discussion. The elements of prioritizing the :inspections will
aid in setting inspection goals, workloads and standards. (']Chis may be a meet
and confer issue.)
PLAN:
Work with team coordinators, Hazardous Materials consultants and every other
counties.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
William Walker, M.D./Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr./Team Coordinators
DUE DATE:
? April 30, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
ISSUE D:
The anticipated data management system required by State Law is not yet
in place.
Briefed on "Envision" HazMat/Finance Tracking Program with vendor. Many
good facts. Dedicated D.P. resource still at issue.
PLAN:
Schedule and implementation of Data System (with support)
1. Site 30 Apr 93
2. Inspections 30 Apr 93
3. Business Plan 31 May 93
4. Tanks 15 Jun 93
5. Haz Waste Generator 30 Aug 93
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Greg Lawler
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
31 Aug 93
The MIS required by the Law is in place now. The MIS Haz. Materials
Program has been working on since Jul 92 integrates all four (4)
major programs and far exceeds anything in the State HazMat Programs
or available off the shelf.
Report Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
' ISSUE REPORT ON DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
ISSUE D•
The anticipated data management system required by State Law is not yet
in place.
STA
Request for dedicated staff sent to D.P. not yet responded to (Thurs 25 Mar 93).
Call into J. Wanger. Module elements to track are five (5) ;sites:
- Inspections
- Underground Tank Program
- Business Plan
- AB 2185
- Hazardous Waste Generator
PLAN:
Meet with D.P. regarding dedicated resources and timelines for element tracks.
t. Schedule training with D.P. for Lotus 1-2-3 (basic and advance) to increase user
staff level of expertise.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Greg Lawler
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
31 Aug 93
The MIS required by the Law is in place now. The MIS Haa. Materials
Program has been working on since Jul 92 integrates all four (4)
major programs and far exceeds anything in the State HazMat Programs
or available off the shelf.
Report #_L Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
ISSUE D:
The anticipated data management system required by-Sta-te, Law is not yet
in place.
STATUS:
AB 2185 Data Management Plan dated 10 Nov 86 was submitted to the State
as part of the legal requirements of AB 2185. This is being reviewed.
Memo to Health Services Department Data Processing sent requesting .
dedicated staff for system support. Reports being generated supporting
AB 2185 Focused Inspection Process.
r.
PLAN:
Meet with Health Services Department Data Processing Manager and
Greg Lawler to review work plan for system implementation.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Greg Lawler
DUE DATE:
31 Aug 93
The MIS required by the Law is in place now. The MIS Haz. Materials
Program has been working on since Jul 92 integrates all four (4)
major programs and far exceeds anything in the State HazMat Programs
or available off the shelf.
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
ISSUE D:
The anticipated data management system required by State Law is not yet
in place.
STATUS:
I have reviewed the law affecting this issue; i.e., Health & Safety Code
Article 8, Chapter 6.95 §25503 (e) (2), Meetings with Greg Lawler concluded
over several days that he can assure completion of MIS System to meet the
Law by 30 Aug 93.
PLAN:
Meet with Health Services Department Data Processing Managers to determine what
assistance we can have. Draw up work plan to track elements of implementing MIS
System. Track completion of tasks and follow up on problem notes. Complete
implementation of MIS System.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Greg Lawler
DUE DATE:
31 Aug 93
Report #_2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUES REPORT ON DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
ISSUE D:
The anticipated data management system required by State Law is not yet
in place. _.
STATUS:
The Data Management System has been designed, needed equipment identified
and programming started.
PLAN:
t Complete Data Management System specs. and implementation timeline.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Greg Lawler
DUE DATE:
Plan is April, 1993
Report #_1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t ISSUE REPORT ON BUSINESS PLAN
ISSUE E:
The Hazardous Materials Division of the Health Services Department has not,
itself, filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although it is generally
agreed that one should have been-fil-ed.
STATUS:
Plan filed. Inspection scheduled for Thursday 9 Apr 93. Will ask Mel Knight
to review process.
PLAN:
Complete inspection and.file report.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Prepared by Jim Gallagher write and submit completed 20, Mar 93
Inspected by Eric Jonsson - 15 Apr 93
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
15 Apr 93
Report #_L Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON BUSINESS PLAN
ISSUE E:
The Hazardous Materials Division of the Health Services Department has not,
itself, filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although it is generally
agreed that one should have been films:-
STATUS:
AB 2185 Plan completed by Jim Gallagher, signed by William Walker on 24 Mar 93.
Plan received into office and assigned to Eric Jonsson for review.
PLAN:
Survey to be scheduled within next two (2) weeks based on priorities.
t
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Prepared by Jim Gallagher - write and submit completed 20 Mar 93
Inspected by Eric Jonsson - 15 Apr 93
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
Eric Johnson - Review
DUE DATE:
15 Apr 93
Report #_L Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
F_ ISSUE REPORT ON BUSINESS PLAN
ISSUE E:
The Hazardous Materials Division of the Health Services Department has not,
itself, filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although it is generally
agreed that one should have been filed. .. - — -- - - —
STATUS:
The Plan has been written.
PLAN:
Review Plan, type and file. Schedule review.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Gallagher - write plan and file.
Eric Johnson - Review
DUE DATE:
15 Apr 93
Report #_L Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS,
+ ISSUE REPORT ON BUSINESS PLAN
ISSUE E:
The Hazardous Materials Division of the Health Services Department has not,
itself, filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although it is generally
agreed tl at-ori ould=:have been filed.-
STATUS:
The HMO Plan had been taken on by Jim Gallagher in Jan 93 before the Grand
Jury Report. Work is progressing and should be completed. imminently. The
review and inspection will be done by Eric Johnson.
PLAN:
Complete the HMD Business Plan and submit. Enter into data base. Inspection
of facility.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Plan completion - Jim Gallagher
AB 2185 Site Inspection - Eric Johnson
DUE DATE:
15 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS ,
ISSUE REPORT ON BUSINESS PLAN
ISSUE E:
The Hazardous Materials Division of the Health Services Department has not,
itself, filed a business plan pursuant to AB 2185 although it is generally
agreed that one should h«: beea---Qed.
STATUS:
Plan still not done.
PLAN:
Work with staff to complete and file.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Eric Johnson
DUE DATE:
April 30, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON INCIDENT PROCEDURES
ISSUE F:
No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they should
=
—7--.-respon •t `a hazardous materials incident, leaWng.to their-yndivid�l =�- --_ _- _- - -
judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any given call.
STATUS:
Policy rough draft distributed to I.R. Team and first discussion at I.R.
Team Meeting 1 Apr 93. Definitions to be developed and, if needed, expanded.
(Draft matrix attached).
PLAN:
Comments expected 8 Apr 93. Matrix to be used to evaluate I.R.'s. Kings County
taken off of Report #4 as reference. Santa Clara County ELdded.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr. and William B. Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t
` ISSUE REPORT ON INCIDENT PROCEDURES
ISSUE F:
No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they should
-- respond to a h rdous.mai dls-ir- ent,_Ieavin, heisr-indi�✓idaial
judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any given call.
STATUS:
Interim matrix guidelines roughed.
PLAN:
Continue discussion with staff and other agencies on these matrix elements
with Sacramento, San Mateo and Kings County.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr. and William B. Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
` ISSUE REPORT ON INCIDENT PROCEDURES
ISSUE F:
No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they should
---respond-1 a hazardous-materials incident, leaving to their indiviidum -- - -
judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any given call.
STATUS:
Continued discussions with staff on elements in decision-malting process
re: Incident Response. Incidents being reviewed to apply to element listing
and roll, no roll decision.
PLAN:
Continue to develop listing matrix calling other HazMat organizations and
form matrix of to roll (go to scene) or not, telephone advisory only and
expected response time.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON INCIDENT PROCEDURES
ISSUE F:
No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they should
-respond to a hazardous mater-ialsincident�'`eaving-i-=their individual
judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any given call.
STATUS:
Compilation of information on E.R. criteria ongoing. Matrix to be
constructed to recognize various circumstances affected E.R. after
hours and on weekends.
PLAN:
Reduce information to time event matrix and rough policy. Review
with affected staff. Publish.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. Staff/Lewis G. Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
` ISSUE REPORT ON INCIDENT PROCEDURES
ISSUE F:
No written procedures exist which guide staff in determining when they should
respond to a hazardous materials incident, leaving to their :individual
judgment the evaluation of whether to respond to any given call.
STATUS:
E.R. staff members have a general understanding of the elements involved
in the decision to respond to a hazardous materials incident call, but
no written documentation is available.
9 PLAN:
E.R. staff will develop a policy detailing the evaluation elements and
process involved in a decision to respond to a hazardous materials incident
call.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. Team Coordinator
DUE DATE:
April 30, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t ISSUE REPORT ON I.R. SCHEDULE CHANGES
ISSUE G:
Incident Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
involved staff without regard fo*�Pther.the change might extend rcWnse
times because no member of the alert team would be in close proximity to
the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle.
STATUS:
Policy rough draft distributed. Second quarter schedule produced and
APR approved. Schedule changes being made according to policy draft.
PLAN:
Receive comments from I.R. Team/Coordinators. Resolve conflicts, publish.
i
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON I.R. SCHEDULE CHANGES
ISSUE
. Incident Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
--.- _ involved_staff.witlhout regard for whether the change might extend=rspoas� e
times because no member of the alert team would be in close proximity to
the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle.
STATUS:
Second quarter schedule being reviewed because of staff available to service
reductions to ten (10). Available teams and changes consider at least
usually (2) or all (3) this side of a bridge. Changes being reviewed by
Administration.
PLAN:
Rough policy.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON I.R SCHEDULE CHANGES
ISS G:
Incident Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
involved staff without regard for whether the change ght ext
nuend response ---
times because no member of the alert team would be in close proximity to
the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle.
STATUS:
Emergency Response name change effective 17 Mar 93 to Incident Response
(IR). IR schedules highlight those staff on duty residing across a
bridge. Staff knowledgeable about concern to modify schedule with at least
one (1) staff Contra Costa side of any bridge. Policy being roughed.
Two (2) staff removing themselves from I.R. on call for personal reasons.
t Staff reviewing 2nd quarter schedule.
PLAN:
Continue to monitor changes. Review rough policy with staff. Advise
Dr. Walker if any problems arise.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS,
f
ISSUE REPORT ON E.R. SCHEDULE CHANGES
ISSUE G:
Emergency Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
staff withoutie and for whether the change mot zxtend response---:5r= —
times because no member of the alert team would be in close proximity to
the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle.
STATUS:
Reviewed issue with affected staff. I am reviewing daily changes and
initialling. Stressed need for recognition of fact that at least one
(1) person on E.R. roster schedule should be on East Bay side of bridges
during scheduled time. Most agree. Nothing re: this came up during meet
and confer session on 9 Mar 93. Several staff indicated at :11 Mar 93
# E.R. meet they want off E.R. schedule (2). Jim H to review with them.
PLAN:
Rough policy including statement on scheduled E.R. staff location during
tour and addressing management review of charges.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. Team members/Lewis G. Pascalli/William Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS '
ISSUE REPORT ON E.R. SCHEDULE CHANGES
ISSUE G:
Emergency Response schedule changes can apparently be approved by the
involved staff without regard-far cher Op.change milt extend res�e
times because no member of the alert team would be in close proximity to
the site of the hazardous materials response vehicle.
STATUS:
The Emergency Response staff creates the schedule every quarter three (3)
months in advance and-self monitors it making changes among the staff
members assuring that coverage is available. Management is not involved or
notified. (Staff indicated that this is a meet and confer issue.)
PLAN:
Develop a policy defining the administration of the Emergency Response
schedule changes and Emergency Response team involvement and management
notification.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. Team members/Lewis G. Pascalli/William Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
April 30, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON EMERGENCY RESPONSE 'TIMES
SSUE H:
Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few years, leading in some cases to complaints regarding the: need to
hold-other e=mergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response &6 -thyltz - - - - =
Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team.
STATUS:
This issue incorporated into 7' response policy (see matrix draft).
Response times are ranges based on the circumstances of the event and
time of day.
PLAN:
Review roughed policy with I.R. Team/Program Coordinator, the HazMat
Council and other County HazMat Directors.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
The image that all reported incidents involving unknown substances are
emergent events posing an imminent threat to the Health & Safety of the
Community or substantial danger to the environment is not accurate. This
response will deal with those perceptions.
Report # 5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES
ISSUE H:
Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few years, leading-ai&-:;omotizmes_to-compl =:egarding-�ite=need to
hold other emergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response from the
Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team.
TA S•
Rough of elements in matrix and time parameters developed by shift.
PLAN:
Review with other County HazMat Directors, staff and finalize policy.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
The image that all reported incidents involving unknown substances are
emergent events posing an imminent threat to the Health & Safety of the
Community or substantial danger to the environment is not accurate. This
response will deal with those perceptions.
Report #_L Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t
ISSUE REPORT ON EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES
ISSUE H:
Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few years,-leading in some cases to complaints regarding the need tai - - - ---- -
hold other emergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response from the
Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team.
STATUS:
Reviewed need to focus response on the reported incident, the time of
day, the location, weather conditions and the reporting policy's
information basis. These factors will be integrated into issue F's
policy.
PLAN:
Continue F's policy development integrating anticipated response times
into the matrix.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Hattum
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
The image that all reported incidents involving unknown substances are
emergent events posing an imminent threat to the Health & Safety of the
Community or substantial danger to the environment is not accurate. This
response will deal with those perceptions.
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES
ISSUE H:
Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few leading in some cases to caiplaints regarding-the need to
hold other emergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response from the
Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team,
STATUS:
Compilation of E.R. times ongoing with weekly E.R. review. Matrix
introduced to staff (see issue F). No concrete evidence found
supporting the statement.
PLAN:
Incorporate matrix being developed for response F into this policy
with matrices to be roughed. Review with staff. Publish.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. staff/Lew Pascalli
DUE DATE:
30 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON EMERGENCY RESPONSE 'TIMES
ISSUE H:
Response times for Emergency Response have been extended over the past
few years, leading in some cases to complaints regarding the: need to
hold other emergency vehicles on scene waiting for a response from the
Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team.
STATUS:
A study of response times noted on E.R. incidents for November,
December and January, 1992 showed an average time of "3? minutes".
It is not clear when the time starts or stops. The response is
usually completed when an E.R. team member arrives on site.
PLAN:
Develop a policy with matrix definitions of the elements involved in an
emergency response.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
E.R. team coordinator
DUE DATE:
May 31, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON AREA PLAN
ISSUE I:
The Area Plan has not been updated as is required by State Law.
STA'T'US:
Area Plan being reviewed. Changes from plan being noted. Certification
procedures will be checked with other counties.
PLAN: '
.Continue the review of the Plan
.Make the changes that actually occurred
.Submit for typing
.Review with appropriate levels and certify
.Submit to State
.Submit to agencies for comment
.Review with Mel Knight on Monday S Apr 93
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
William B. Walker, M.D.
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
The Area Plan process is a dynamic process that requires ongoing review and
analysis of response to HazMat incidents. State Law requires that an administering
agency certify to the State office every three years that it has conducted a
complete review of its area plan and has made any necessary revisions. This has
been occurring over the past year and will continue as circumstances, law and
regulations dictate.
Report # 5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON AREA PLAN
ISSLJE I:
The Area Plan has not been updated as is required by State Law.
TA
Area Plan being reviewed. Changes from plan being noted„
PLAN:
.Continue the review of the Plan
.Make the changes that actually occurred
.Submit for typing
.Review with appropriate levels and certify
.Submit to State
r .Submit to agencies for comment
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
William B. Walker, M.D.
APPROVED BY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
The Area Plan process is a dynamic process that requires ongoing review and
analysis of response to HazMat incidents. State Law requires that an administering
agency certify to the State office every three years that it has conducted a
complete review of its area plan and has made any necessary revisions. This has
been occurring over the past year and will continue as circumstances, law and
regulations dictate.
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/'93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON AREA PLAN
ISSUE L
The Area Plan has not been updated as is required by State Law.
STATUS:
We have received the California OFS Area Plan checklist used by
the State to review our Plan. Sections of the Plan are being
reviewed to determine which areas have, in fact, changed.
PLAN:
Continue the review of the Plan. Make the changes that are known.
' Send to the State and then to the numerous agencies mentioned in the
Plan for comments.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
William B. Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
The Hazardous Materials Programs' Interagency Task Force mentioned last
week is newly-formed and not the appropriate forum to review the overall
plan.
Report #_2
Dated: 3/19/93
{
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON AREA PLAN
ISSUE I:
The Area Plan has not been updated as is required by State Law.
STATUS:
Discussed our submission with State. They do not know when they
will review. Discussion with WW lead to conclusion of immediate
review to update what is changed and submit to State. Thein
submit to review agencies involved for comment. Reviewed law and
internal review documents State uses.
{ PLAN:
Review plan with agencies (telephone, if possible) for obvious
changes. Make changes. Submit to State.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli/William B. Walker, M.D.
DUE DATE:
30 Jun 93
Report #? Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
t ISSUE REPORT ON AREA PLAN
ISSUE I:
The Area Plan has not.been updated as is required by State Law.
STATUS:
The Contra Costa County Area Plan update was due in 1991. Although the State has
not reviewed the January, 1988 submission, an update is due every three (3) years
certifying that the Plan has been reviewed and changes have been made as
appropriate. (Health and Safety Code §§25500 et seg.) This will need to be
reviewed by all agencies involved, Hazardous Materials Commission and the Board
of Supervisors.
PLAN:
Begin the review with the Hazardous Materials Division Interagency Task Force, the
Police Chiefs organization and the Fire Chiefs. The Hazardous Materials
Commission will reviewand submit to the Board of Supervisors for transmission to
the State.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
DUE DATE:
June 30, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
j
ISSUE REPORT F CLERICAL STAFF
i
i`
I
ISSUE J:
Cleric staff working in the Hazardous Materials Programs have apparently not been
provid�d the information which is required bfState Law and which-w ind eaed in
the Department's own internal documents as being a part of the Hazard
Communications Plan.
4--
STATUS:
The training received by HSD Policy #152, the Federal Right-to-Know Law
and the HMD's Business Plan has been completed. The plan was developed in
Sep 92.by Jim Gallagher with training scheduled in the first quarter of 93.
Two hour classes were held on 11 Feb 93 and 9 Mar-93. All Admin. support
team attended and documented.
PLAN:
Annual training update requirement put on master calendar for 94 review.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Gallagher, Occupational Health Specialist
DUE DATE:
Completed 9 Mar 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT OF CLERICAL STAFF
ISSUE J:
Clerical staff working in the Hazardous Materials Division have apparently not been
provided sue of *oration which-i LF^ uired=? State U- w and-which was indicated in — -�
the Department's own internal documents as being a part of the Hazard
Communications Plan. .
STATUS:
A program has been developed and presented to the clerical staff.
Three (3) clerical staff completed it several weeks ago. The remaining
four (4) will complete it on March 9, 1993.
PLAN:
Document program and attendance.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Jim Gallagher
DUE DATE:
March 9, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON ORGANIZATIONAL STAFFING
ISSUE K:
Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern in the
Hazardous Materials Programs. - -
STATUS:
Review of the organizational structure and staffing continues. Telephone
calls to Sacramento, San Mateo and Alameda Counties have. been made seeking
their examples.
PLAN:
Continue review. Set up meeting with Northern California 14azardous
Materials Managers on May 20, 1993 to get input from othe:r counties.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
APPROVED BY:
William B. Walker, M.D.
Mark Finucane
DUE DATE:
? 30 Apr 93
Report # .5 Dated: 4/2/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
l
ISSUE REPORT ON ORGANIZATIONAL STAFFING
SS K:
Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern in the
Hazardous Materials Fro&tas. -- — -
STATUS:
Review of the organizational structure and staffing continues. Telephone '
calls to Sacramento, San Mateo and Alameda Counties have been made seeking
their examples.
PLAN:
1
Continue review. Set up meetings; i.e., (20 May 93) to get input from other
counties.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
APPROVED BY:
William B. Walker, M.D.
Mark Finucane
DUE DATE:
? 30 Apr 93
Report # 4 Dated: 3/26/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
r •
{ ISSUE REPORT ON ORGANIZATIONAL STAFFING
ISSUE K:
Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern in the
Hazardous Materials Programs.
STATUS:
Review of Operations, Communications and Program/District structure
continuing. Administrative support team (clerical) unit reviewed.
PLAN:
$ Continue review. Include reporting, billing and data management needs
into organizational structure.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. PascaK Jr.
DUE DATE: '
? 30 Apr 93
Report # 3 Dated: 3/19!93
K
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON ORGANIZATIONAL STAFFING
ISSUE K:
Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern in the
Hazatdoifs IYlxneiials-Programs. —
STATUS:
I am reviewing operations/communications among programs and between staff,
teams, districts and management.
PLAN:
Make recommendations after reviewing programs and structure and need for clear
lines of authority, responsibility and communication.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
? 30 Apr 93
Report # 2 Dated: 3/12/93
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
ISSUE REPORT ON ORGANIZATIONAL STAFFING
ISSUE K:
Determining the most appropriate organizational staffing pattern in the
Hazardous Materials Programs. - - — -
STATUS:
I am reviewing operations/communications among programs and between staff,
teams, districts and management.
PLAN:
t Make recommendations to set an organizational structure which will create
' clear lines of authority and communication.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
DUE DATE:
April 13, 1993
Report # 1 Dated: 3/5/93
• 1 1 � I
I
E
E
O
lb O
N oc0 0 3
41 Aj
C en >4
m ao x >1mro
Ix . +•o a v z.0 zcc 0.0
0
a x x
0
z
o x x
a
m
b
a
x B .4 ON -4 4
a
m
4 .C,4 4 4
E O x O O
y y 3 1.1 3 3
a m p
y ooc 3
C a 41 41 0 4.1
O d 0 0 d m 0 0 0 10
a z10zV z10z10
0
a x x x x
wz°
CK 0
a +1 a
t 8 a -+
w 1� •a 0
z a z a
0
aI m
N B
W -A
a E
N m cc 010144 p $a
Zrte, ad al al 00 .ro•4•d 0
Ca1rou0
m Em i0u0 ^E" Pro.
U - � cou4M �40%m ° �
44
41 um° rm m r1 bw1 0 .., o0I a, ai rm
0 m m +,°v'0 w ro m w v O y Co co v a
a1 OCC c al c al•.I t al 1 1 N N
a c•.+ ro E—1 r1 w-+ 1+ u a.+ v v v v
m a° x x x
eti
i° 0
a z
.•1
a° x x
e
0
a1to w
al �
4 O E E E E E E
c a
a v v v v v v
0
U
C c 0 ro C 41 4 c p1 0 p+ 41 >,y V Ip •p Ip
00c
"4 p 0 >. C c� 0d >.y aJ
r p y1 c 41 41 4j 41
CA goC .d .0 b O+ A m $4 41ro
atm �•+ � a c a >4ro'o
.i a ro ,jC AJ.r •a 0 ° 41-A 41 0 ,1 d $4 7 a QJ , a
V w w V •••1 ro 11 "4 a+1 C p 41
ra. .1 14 EC4j O -4 w> -1 0- m0 to > aro aro
OwcCid0-.40114 41 0CUOw OU ° aai a mi al0i � 44p'14010r
' z 041 4w u 3 c a 0 0 0 a z 0 u L 44 !� 1 ro I ro a l ro 1 ro
0% 0% O%
aJ C C C
H
N $4 4
� m ; 3 3 3
N (Cod Z t t .0 t .0
Aj
Q to V' K >+ X >+X >9 N V N V N
m 1 4) to 4) romro1 1 1
a N Z V Z 10 Z.0 �+ N �4 N •�
1-4
0
a x x x
0
z
o x x x x x x
a
ti
a
a
A
a
a m
E
E
d m m to In
Ar a! 4 ij a) 4 JIJ 4 1j 4
.4 .r
G m m >1tirotimi
a N in O Q •+ Im .� Q
.4
0
C4 x x x
►a 0 0
a d a =
H +1 yi
8 O+
z o x x x x x
x a a
Aj 14 W 14 14
0
N 8
41 •.1
a E
H �
z a E
M � H
d m m m m m m m
N C O O O O 7 O 0 0 7
10 t t t 0 C t t 0
ca r t
a N N N V V N V
ra 0
x a x
to
0
z
.4
a x x x x x x x x
c
O
4
JJ Q) .� n
to m C C C C C C C
a p E E E E E E E
c �.
'E� a ' v v v v v v v
0
U
4 3 d y b �'d e "
41 d >, d o4mro
a1 cC m Aj b 4V yro O m 4 3CbmM0
O ^4 C ro 4 b .r aro .� to 4 b rt oro @144J �
ro ro '" 4'v 'a of a a b+ro+4) 4vro a w d a cy tato
ro4
U ,, �m14 oa c, ja °a, wow� oa a, roa xmc U
~ 410>70a� ma0rolCOrolaCrolCCrol yuG� madCOro) >Ia000rol Calm ac
ro d 4) 4744 4 � 4 row 4) 0) 4744 404 ro0 >+x
0O.004444 1 4 1 ba i id ro M 04444 1 ro i toa 1 90 1 ro mu4Ava
* c
G
H H
rr
u a u a
� •cc � w
14
O
04 � Fm X10
d H
M
oo,�►x
O o� 0) a a 7
ri H H W G
VA 01 41 H
rtf G t p N ttti
v �� E a
0 H
O "' Q1 3
N
H r+
Cd� m ava
a Z ) 41 GV
N o a a'•►D00
H m A u•� G•v
41,
W o oU 0 3
Z O �W
0 � e
o a
4 0
U
`A a al
:a
+
Fo
0 v A a o d v
H 1
wE0�'
a �
o
;. w m
A Z aa► ,,�G fl m p y
14 '"4 C1 d dl G ^
O -4p�
tLt•O �0 4 .�► ¢1
e4 A
yuv G a
0
jo G to
m
to G md�H 3y y
to
a ' "� A o s
j c o
o� ao Ago o p dFa
dd a � d
U IA
r+
y 6 v �d � � � a
t G u G t H
y �G 0 c ? oast vLo o
�p Ao °` �► F A owy3 v
5�
G %A d 41 td W
pyo O
„a OF7G �yyFa
N y d