| CALIFORNIA BILL ALLOWS WASTE REGULATORS TO HI-JACK DEMOCRACY http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_1201-1250/ab_1207_bill_20070223_introduced.html Subject: CALIFORNIA BILL ALLOWS WASTE REGULATORS TO HI-JACK DEMOCRACY Date: 4/5/2007 8:43:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time From: BynJam@aol.com To: Assemblymember.Smyth@assembly.ca.gov CC: Senator.Florez@sen.ca.gov April 5, 2007 An open communication to: Assemblymember Cameron Smyth: As a graduate in Rhetoric and Communications from the University of California, Davis I am sure you can understand the irony between your campaign rhetoric and your ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1207, An act to amend Sections 43020 and 43035 of, and to add Section 43020.2 to, the Public Resources Code, relating to solid waste. This bill to overturn sludge bans would pave the road to a living hell for many people in California with forced exposure to toxic substances, hazardous materials and hazardous waste. Why then would you want to turn the health and welfare of the people of California over to a few people responsible for shovelling shit into the waters and onto your parks, schoolyards and food crops? This is a far cry from the rhetoric presented to the people. The rhetoric: My Campaign operates solely on your kind donations. Please contribute today to help communicate my message of lower taxes, less government red tape and the defense of values all our families cherish... The rhetoric: I have dedicated my efforts on these pieces of legislation because I believe that recreation is vital to sustaining healthy cities as well as healthy families. Parks get people outside and active, improving their lives. This is critical to ensuring that Santa Clarita continues to be the wonderful, attractive community that it is. The rhetoric: Residents all over the Los Angeles basin would see an increase in traffic congestion, worsening air quality, along with numerous other impacts which would negatively affect the health and well being of our families" Smyth said. "We need to do everything we can to protect the quality of life in the region, and my legislation is another tool to shield the community from the damage this mega mine would cause." The rhetoric: Assemblyman Cameron Smyth, R-Santa Clarita, today announced that he has been named Vice-Chair of the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee for the 2007-08 legislative session. “Protecting the public health of Californians and our state’s diverse environment is an extremely complex subject area." “This position provides me the opportunity to positively influence many of California’s most pressing environmental issues." As Vice Chair, I will direct the committee towards scientifically sound policies that promote a healthy environment and a strong economy." The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxics Committee primarily focus on issues pertaining to toxic substances and hazardous materials, hazardous waste regulation, drinking water regulation, and pesticides (processed food safety and public health protection). Paving the road to hell with ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1207 in violation of California and federal law: The purpose: (j) Several cities and counties have established a patchwork of ordinances and regulations that ban or severely restrict the use of biosolids for land application, creating a problem for local government agencies by limiting the number of environmentally sound options available for managing biosolids and restricting their ability to safely manage the biosolids that are generated. Didn't you say? "We need to do everything we can to protect the quality of life in the region." Why would you use the word "biosolids" which has no relationship to any federal law or regulation? What does sound options mean? "the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced a $72,000 fine against the Southeast Regional Reclamation Authority's municipal wastewater treatment plant in Dana Point, Calif. for failing to treat sewage sludge to sufficiently reduce harmful bacteria, viruses and other pathogens before providing it to farmers for use as a fertilizer, a violation of the Clean Water Act." http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress. nsf/bf92f4e7d755207d8525701c005e38d7/c99170b0f2779072852570d8005e1469!OpenDocument Under he Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), bacteria and viruses actually makes the sewage sludge (biosolids) a hazardous waste being delivered to farmers. Even the pathogens acknowledge by EPA makes it a hazardous waste. Even the reclaimed sewage effluent used for irrigation is dangerous to be discharged into rivers during the dry season according to a University of California study. The study states," NSD's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board provides for the discharge of treated wastewater into the adjacent Napa River during the wet season (November through April), but during the dry season (May through October) river discharge is prohibited." "During the non-discharge period, water is recycled for irrigation purposes or stored for wet season discharge." "the study confirms that the Napa Sanitation District is prohibited from discharging into the NAPA River during the time frame it wants to use the same prohibited sewage effluent discharge for irrigation purposes on vineyards." http://thewatchers.us/7-NAPA-california-reclaim-water.html This is the same sewage effluent the Napa County Watershed Information Center and Conservancy would have you irrigate schoolyards and parks where children play. They say, "The Sonoma Valley is a perfect place to start purple piping locally. Vineyards, schools and golf courses are within easy reach of the local treatment plant." Would this be the same type of irrigation water used to irrigate spinach and lettuce in the Salinas Valley? Paving the road with rhetoric: The bill would, notwithstanding any other provision of law, make any existing and future ordinance or regulations that are contrary to, inconsistent with, or have the effect of prohibiting an activity permitted by a regulation with regard to the composting and disposal of biosolids adopted by the board to be void and of no effect. Did you really mean ignoring all other provisions of law in favor of a regulation adopted by a board who has never read federal pollution control law or EPA's bosolids composting fact sheet? EPA states the following:
Paving the road with rhetoric: The bill would require the board to adopt, by July 1, 2009, regulations for the land application of biosolids, which would include standards for the land application of biosolids according to sound principles of land use, agriculture, conservation, resource management, public health, and protection of ground water. As a lawmaker and the expert on toxic substances and hazardous materials, hazardous waste regulation, drinking water regulation, and pesticides, you must be aware of the List of 220 Hazardous Inorganic and Organic Constituents of concern in the real CWA regulation 40 CFR 258. Furthermore, you know that the Hazardous Waste regulation has reserved two sections for addressing treatment of infectious disease causing material and listing disease causing agents it refers to as Etiologic agents (a DOT term). Paving the road with rhetoric: In July 2004, the California State Water Resources Control Board adopted State Water Quality Order 2004– 0012 general waste discharge requirements regulating the land application of biosolids as a soil amendment or fertilizer and developed an environmental impact report to support the statewide general order. The general order is a regulatory process used to streamline the discharge of biosolids for use as a soil amendment. The bill would provide that the application of those regulations are uniform throughout the state. The bill would prohibit a local governmental entity from adopting or enforcing any ordinance or regulation that would be inconsistent with, or would have the effect of prohibiting an activity permitted by, those regulations adopted by the board. This section does not authorize the board to adopt regulations that are less stringent than those adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Part 503 (commencing with Section 503.1) of Subchapter O of Chapter 1 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Actually, according to EPA there are only 7 states approved to administer the Part 503 rules. California is not one of those states. As you acknowledge, this is a solid waste rule, "EPA's role in the management of industrial nonhazardous Waste [sludge] is very limited. Under RCRA Subtitle D, EPA issued minimal criteria prohibiting "open dumps" (40 CFR 257) in 1979. The states, not EPA, are responsible for implementing the "open dumping criteria," and EPA has no back- up enforcement role." (FR. 62, 19, p. 4284, January 29, 1997) NSA Fact Sheet #100, January 25, 1997, http://www.penweb.org/issues/sludge/100.htm Paving the road with rhetoric: The board, in cooperation with the Office of Emergency Services, shall develop an integrated waste management disaster plan to provide for the handling, storage, processing, transportation, and diversion from disposal sites, or provide for disposal at a disposal site where absolutely necessary, of solid waste and biosolids, resulting from a state of emergency or a local emergency, as defined, respectively, in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 8558 of the Government Code. What does the state consider to be an emergency when sewage effluent is used to irrigate food crops, parks and schoolyard and sewage sludge (biosolids) is used to fertilizer food crops, parks and schoolyards as well as home lawns? Since EPA started promoting this madness epidemics have exploded. Would you consider the following to be an emergency? Reclaimed water contaminating food crops in the Salinas Valley 25 million young girls and women are infected with the papillomavirus 3 to 6 million children die each year from infectious gastroenteritis. 76+ million people in the United States get gastroenteritis from food borne disease organisms. Disease organisms that cause gastroenteritis attack other organs in the body and cause death. Gastroenteritis is caused by chemicals, toxins, and infectious disease organisms. What happened to the State of California's intent for environmental sound waste disposal to conserve water, energy and other natural resources.? Paving the road with rhetoric: In 1989, the Legislature enacted the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Division 30 (commencing with Section 40000) of the Public Resources Code). The act was enacted to reduce, recycle, and reuse solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible in an efficient and cost- effective manner to conserve water, energy, and other natural resources, to protect the environment, to improve regulation of existing solid waste landfills, to ensure that new solid waste landfills are environmentally sound, to improve permitting procedures for solid waste management facilities, and to specify the responsibilities of local governments to develop and implement integrated waste management programs. Is it you intent to make the past creation of solid waste open dumps legal? Paving the road with rhetoric: On or before July 1, 2009, as part of the existing regulatory review process for regulations adopted pursuant to this article, the board shall adopt regulations for the land application of biosolids, consistent with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.), the federal prohibition on ocean disposal, the state policy to encourage reuse instead of disposal, and the proven economic and environmental benefits of biosolids. This section is completely inconsistent with 33 U.S.C Sect. 1251 et seq. since it authorizes the removal of sludge from a point source of pollution (treatment plant) to a nonpoint source of pollution (farmland). (7) it is the national policy that programs for the control of nonpoint sources of pollution be developed and implemented in an expeditious manner so as to enable the goals of this Act to be met through the control of both point and nonpoint sources of pollution. TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 82 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 6901§ 6901 Congress finds with respect to the environment and health, that— (3) as a result of the Clean Air Act [42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.], the Water Pollution Control Act [33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.], and other Federal and State laws respecting public health and the environment, greater amounts of solid waste (in the form of sludge and other pollution treatment residues) have been created. Similarly, inadequate and environmentally unsound practices for the disposal or use of solid waste have created greater amounts of air and water pollution and other problems for the environment and for health; (1) although land is too valuable a national resource to be needlessly polluted by discarded materials, most solid waste is disposed of on land in open dumps and sanitary landfills; (4) open dumping is particularly harmful to health, contaminates drinking water from underground and surface supplies, and pollutes the air and the land; Paving the road with rhetoric: The EPA has adopted rules under Part 503 (commencing with Section 503.1) of Subchapter O of Chapter 1 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (503 rules) that result in the safe and beneficial use of biosolids when properly managed in accordance with their rules. It is true that retired EPA employee Alan Rubin makes that claim. It appears the EPA was hi-jacked by one person during the 1978-79 sludge war at EPA, however, EPA has never written that sludge used as a fertilizer is safe for beneficial use, nor is there any study that actually makes that claim. EPA has documented 25 families of pathogens in sludge. EPA has documented 21 cancer causing chemicals in sludge. EPA has admitted it did not do a risk assessment for any chemicals, toxic heavy metals or pathogens. EPA has stated it lacked adequate data to determine a safe level. EPA's David Lewis reveal the sludge magic and did a study which proved harm to people living near sludge sites. The Part 503 EPA policy guideline is based on exclusions in the RCRA, CWA and CERCLA. Paving the road with rhetoric: Since the promulgation of 503 rules in 1993, biosolids management practices in California have shifted from mostly disposal, including ocean disposal or landfilling, to mostly reuse, and biosolids reuse, through land application and other means, is both regulated and encouraged by the 503 regulations. It is true that the Part 503 sludge guidelines are self-permitting in all but the seven states approved by EPA to permit open dumps on farmland. EPA and its partners have promoted the use of sludge as a fertilizer and operated a multi- million dollar public relations campaign to convince politicians and the public that sludge use is safe, but it notes in 503.9(t) that exposure to any of the chemicals or pathogens through the air, water, or food chain could cause death, disease, cancer, etc. Paving the road with rhetoric: The state desires to regulate the application of biosolids to agricultural land in a manner that is safe, environmentally beneficial, and sensitive to the needs of the communities involved. Which community needs are you interested in protecting with this law? Are you interested in victims? "Several cities and counties have established a patchwork of ordinances and regulations that ban or severely restrict the use of biosolids for land application." On the one hand the voters of Kern County banned sludge from Los Angeles. On the other hand, Los Angeles did the studies for EPA which could not identify many chemicals in sludge and found that composting did not destroy all disease organism in sludge. Paving the road with rhetoric: “Biosolids” means the solid, semisolid, or liquid residue generated during the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. “Biosolids” include, but are not limited to, treated domestic septage and scum or solids removed in primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment processes or solids that have been dried or stabilized. Can you think of one treatment plant in California that actually produces biosolids by treating only domestic sewage from humans and household operations without any industrial or hospital waste in it.? 503.9(g) Domestic sewage is waste and wastewater from humans or household operations that is discharged to or otherwise enters a treatment works. (14) The term ``open dump'' means any facility or site where solid waste is disposed of which is not a sanitary landfill which meets the criteria promulgated under section 6944 of this title and which is not a facility for disposal of hazardous waste. (26) The term ``sanitary landfill'' means a facility for the disposal of solid waste which meets the criteria published under section 6944 of this title. [i.e. Part 258-- see part 503.4] (26A) The term ``sludge'' means any solid, semisolid or liquid waste generated from a municipal, commercial, or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility or any other such waste having similar characteristics and effects. (27) The term ``solid waste'' means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include solid or dissolved material in domestic sewage, [from human and household operations in pipeline] or solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or industrial discharges which are point sources subject to permits under section 1342 of title 33, or source, special nuclear, or byproduct material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (68 Stat. 923) [42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.]. Paving the road with rhetoric: “Land application” means the application of biosolids to land to either condition the soil or to fertilize crops or other vegetation grown in soil. Since municipal treatment plants treat both industrial and domestic sewage sludge is generated, not biosolids. EPA said: "When sewage sludge is not used to condition the soil or to fertilize crops or vegetation grown on the land, the sewage sludge is not being land applied. It is been disposed of on the land. In that case, the requirements in the subpart on surface disposal in the final part 503 must be met." (FR. 58, 32, p. 9330) However, sludge for beneficial use may be too contaminated with arsenic (75 ppm) and chromium (100,000 ppm) to be placed in a surface disposal site which restricts arsenic (73 ppm) and chromium (600 ppm) under part 503. Isn't the Hazardous waste level for chromium is 5 (five) ppm? With all due respect, Jim Bynum Help for Sewage Victims |