Loading...
Resolution No. 3935RESOLUTION NO. 3935 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN PER AB 2595 (TANNER 1990) WHEREAS, the City of Cypress in cooperation with the County of Orange initiated development of the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan - January 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Plan) to provide policy direction and action programs to address current and future hazardous waste management issues having local responsibility and involvement in Orange County. and WHEREAS, preparation of the Plan was directed by the Orange County Board of Supervisors in February 1987 pursuant to State Assembly Bill 2948 (Tanner 1986) and WHEREAS, the Plan was developed by Orange County staff in accordance with the requirements and procedures of State Assembly Br11 2948 and the California Department of Health Services Guidelines for the Preparation of Hazardous Waste Management Plans (June 30 1987) and WHEREAS, the Plan was developed with the involvement and oversight of the Orange County Tanner Advisory Committee and the participation of agency representatives from cities County State and special districts and WHEREAS, an extensive public participation conducted throughout the Plan development process wh public information meetings public hearings, presentations to public agencies and private or mailing list and media notification, open committee m the receipt and response to hundreds of verbal comments on the Plan from agencies and citizens and WHEREAS, the Tanner Advisory Committee approved recommended approval by the Board of Supervisor Councils of Orange County• and program was ich included workshops ganizations, eetings, and and written the Plan and s and City WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to receive public testimony on the Plan, and WHEREAS, Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 490 was prepared to address the environmental effects mitigation treasures and project alternatives associated with the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan and WHEREAS, EIR 490 was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the State CEQA Guideline- and the County s Environmental Procedures and WHEREAS, written and verbal comments on received from the public during and after a public and WHEREAS, the Orange County Planning Commiss public hearing to receive public testimony with 490 and EIR 490 were review period, ion conducted a respect to EIR WHEREAS, comments received on EIR 490 were responded to through a Response to Comments document submitted to the Planning Commission and received by this Board, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed all documentation comprising EIR 490 and has found that the EIR 490 thoroughly analyzes and documents environmental impacts of the Plan, and that it fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and 1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended to this Board that EIR 490 be certified as complete and adequate and WHEREAS, Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15901 of the State CEQA Guidelines require that the Board of Supervisors make one or more of the following findings prior to approval of a Plan for which an EIR has been completed, identifying one or more significant effects of the Plan, along with statements of facts supporting each finding - Finding 1 - Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Plan that mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the EIR. Finding 2 Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency Finding 3 Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures of the Plan alternatives identified in the EIR, and WHEREAS, Section 15093(a) of the Guidelines requires the Board of Supervisors to balance the benefits of a proposed Plan against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project and WHEREAS, Section 15093(b) requires where the decision of the Board of Supervisors allows the occurrence of significant effects that are identified in the EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the Agency must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the final EIR or other information in the record, and WHEREAS, the County of Orange Board of Supervisors had reviewed and has considered EIR 490 and certified Final EIR 490 for the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan as complete and adequate in that the EIR addresses the environmental impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives of the Plan, and complies with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines 'aid Final EIR is composed of the following items a Draft EIR 490 for the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, including appendices b. Comments received on the DEIR and responses to these comments c EMA Report to the Planning Commission dated December 20 1988 All ot the above information has been and will be on file with the County ot Orange Environmental Management Agency Environmental and Special Projects Division, 12 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana California. And, the Board adopted findings with respect to significant environmental effects mitigation measures related thereto, and alternatives to the Plan identified in EIR 490 as set forth in the document title Board of Supervisors Findings for FEIR 490 And, the Board adopted the list of mitigation measures which mitigation measures are incorporated into the Plan or shall be implemented concurrent with Plan implementation. 2 2„5 And, the Board found that, although EIR 490 identifies certain significant environmental effects that may occur if the Plan is implemented, all significant effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been reduced to an acceptable level by the imposition of mitigation measures. And, the Board adopted said mitigation measures monitoring program and directed EMA in consultation with Fire Services, to include the program as part of plan implementation. WHEREAS, as a result of the State Department of Health s disapproval of Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan on December 10, 1990 revisions have been made to the Plan (Attachment I) and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cypress hereby approves the Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, with implementation contingent upon funding availability and makes the following findings 1 Final EIR No 490 previously certified on January 25, 1989 and considered prior to approval of the project, was determined adequate to serve as a Program EIR for this project and satisfies all requirements of CEQA. 2 The following amendments to the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan are hereby accepted and includes a Fair Share language change to the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Specifically the addition of the State Department of Health Services policy letter language pertaining to fair share to Section V 3 Orange County Facility Siting Policy b Changes to Siting criteria, Table V 3, Criteria Number 6 (Containment and Groundwater Monitoring) and Number 7 (Water Quality) c Inclusion of descriptive overview of the Orange County Project Review Process d. Inclusion of mapping criteria classification as presented by the Environmental Management Agency in memo dated October 10, 1990 (Attachment II) e Cortection to the title on the General Study Map entitled Treatment Recycling and Collection Facilities to specify types of facilities by adding descriptions of facility types transfer and storage treatment, recycling solidification or stabilization, and incineration (Attachment III) f Inclusion of the Conditional Use Permit/Site Plan Process Flow Chart presented by the Environmental Management Agency (Attachment IV) 3 The Hazardous Materials Program Office/Orange County Fire Department is hereby authorized to transmit the approved amendments to the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan to the tate Department of Health Services 1 (.•3J PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cypress at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of May 1991 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS ATTEST. CITY CLERK OF TH4 TY CYPRESS STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS I DARRELL ESSEX, City Clerk of the City of Cypress, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the said City Council held on the 13th day of May 1991 by the following roll call vote. AYES 5 COUNCIL MEMBERS. Age, Kerry Nicholson, Partin and NOES 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS None Bowman ABSENT 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS. None CITY CLERKOF THE TY OF CYPRESS ATTACHMENT 1 Addition to 7.3 Crange County Facility Siting Policy (Interpretation of Fair Share Policy) Anoroval of orcoosed hazardous waste management facilities that do not exceed a jurisdiction s "fair share' will depend on siting criteria and other criteria r=equired by existing law, unless effective interlurisdi.Ctional agreements provide for adequate hazardous waste management capacity for the specific hazardous waste which the facility would have handled in another California County. A county can refect a orotosed hazardous waste management facility/project that exceeds its "fair share' if `_here are effective interlurisdictiona] agreements for the management of the specific hazardcus waste generated in the county or there is adequate capacity to handle these wastes in the county. I£ adequate capacity does not exist in the county, or effective interiurisdictional agreements do not exist, a jurisdiction shall not relent hazardous waste management proposals that exceed 'fair share' if the proponent demonstrates that the 'fair share" facility (i.e., smaller facility) is economically nonviable, except in cases in which the jurisdiction demonstrates that there are anoreciably increased public health and/or environmental risks associated with the proposed facility. 7 ANALYSIS Hazardous waste management facilities that meet the County s "fair share" can be approved depending upon criteria required by law Exception. if other California counties have the capacity and agree to handle specific hazardous wastes The County can reject a waste facility that exceeds its "fair share" if suitable arrangements have been made with other counties, or if the County has capacity to handle the hazardous wastes If the County doesn t have the capacity or no other arrangements have been made with other counties the County shall not reject uneconomic 'fair share" hazardous waste facilities Exception Where the proposed facility could adversely impact public health and/or the environment fl 4- J ,. The "fair share" language contained in this Plan is only effective in conjunction with interjurisdictional county agreements 2 - COMMENTS Per Department of Health Services letter of June 13 1990 "Effective" Interiurisdictional Agreements - Counties have asked about the meaning of the term 'effective" as used in the preceding discussion of interj urisdictional agreements and their relation to acceptable "fair share" statements in CHWMPs It is the department's position that at this early date it would not be meaningful to attempt to define the term in some precise manner A definition now might ultimately work against counties by foreclosing options for such agreements which have not yet been developed or foreseen. In any case if a hazardous waste management facility is rejected by a county based upon "fair share" provision in the CHWMP and upon the facility's inconsistency with interjurisdictional agreements and if an appeal board is convened to review that local decision, the appeal board will review all aspects of the decision in making its determination of whether to uphold or overturn it. The appeal board will review all documents and information which are relevant to the local agency's decision to disapprove a proposed facility including the CHWMP (approved or disapproved) the applicable General Plan and any documentation or evidence of interjurisdictional agreements to manage hazardous waste In other words to the extent that an appeal board must make such a determination in order to render its decision an appeal board would judge whether 'effective" interjurisdictional agreements are in place _ Chances to Specific Siting Criteria 6 Containment and Groundwater Monitoring All Facilities Facilities shall be fully enclosed by containment structures of impermeable materials which would contain any unauthorized release of hazardous material Facilities shall be equipped with leak detection and spill control and recovery capability Groundwater monitoring wells must be located around each facility to determine background vadose zone and ground water quality and to detect leaks and spills from the facility unless demonstrated to be safe without them through the Health and Safety Assessment. An ongoing groundwater monitoring program should be developed in consultation with local state and water district representatives - 3 COMMENTS This criterion does not put unreasonable constraints on facilities For example existing refuse transfer facilities are typically constructed with a concrete or asphalt pad Secondly the hazardous waste industry is getting away from hazardous waste storage on soil Any proposed facility will have to meet pr000sed stormwater regulations This will necessitate isolation of facilities from stormwater require a controlled drainage plan and potentially require some form of stormwater treatment The requirement to provide monitoring wells regardless of the type of facility has been modified. The initial condition of a site will still need to be determined. In that process wells and cores drilled during a site assessment could be developed as monitoring wells at very little cost if need is demonstrated The modification regarding groundwater monitoring wells has been made to allow the project to demonstrate need via the Health and Safety assessment 7 2a}ar Quality All Facilities Facilities shall not be sited within watershed areas tributary which flow to open reservoirs or aqueducts that contain drinking water supplies Facilities shall locate such that domestic water supply wells cannot be adversely affected from unauthorized releases of contaminants As a guideline facilities should locate at least one mile from domestic supply wells in the Forebay areas (principal recharge area to the Orange County groundwater basin) and at least one-half mile from domestic supply wells in the pressure area of the Orange County groundwater basin unless demonstrated to be safe at closer proximity through the Health and Safety Assessment. Facilities shall not locate within well head protection zones as identified by EPA guidelines or municipal water supply agencies and local water districts unless demonstrated to be safe at closer proximity through the Health and Safety Assessment Facilities shall not impact the quality of surface waters (lakes reservoirs streams creeks etc.) or groundwater resources which have been identified for beneficial uses by the Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan (per State Water Resources Control board Policy Resolution 88-63) The required Health and Safety Assessment will identify water quality issues Facilities must meet Federal state and local water quality requirements Comments The first sentence is self explanatory Facilities shall not be sited where runoff from the facility flows into storm drains channels or creeks which discharge into reservoirs or aqueducts which are drinking water sources Typically reservoirs and aqueducts are located at high elevations This sentence would prohibit locating a facility above them. Fpr example a facility shall not be located above Irvine Lake in Orange County or Lake Mathews in Riverside County The siting of facilities in the watershed above reservoirs which do not collect runoff for drinking water purposes would not be affected by this sentence For example, San Joaquin Reservoir which is an open domestic water reservoir surrounded by wall and receives no runoff The location of facilities one mile from domestic wells in the forebay and one-half mile in the pressure zone is presented as a guideline and not a prohibition No absolute minimum distance between the facility and domestic wells is required. The actual safe distance will be determined during the Health and Safety Assessment Hydrogeologic evaluation of the Orange County groundwater basin has shown that wells within a proximity of one mile affect each other If a hazardous waste treatment facility "leaks" into the groundwater and is required to drill a well to reverse groundwater flow then this remediation may affect the production of neighboring wells and impair local water agencies from delivering water to its customers The prohibition of locating facilities within well head protection zones as stipUl6ted by Federal and state regi(tion is stated in the criterion to avoid conflict with Federal and state regulation now and in the future Treatment recycling and co 14 ���iyion facilities Faci'i±ties are encouraged 4..emit-i-eeeteng-411 to locate outside of r.�leiral structured recharge areas to regional aquifers as defined in local or state plans including the Forebay area Facilities may locate in the following areas only with increased engineered design features such as horizontal and vertical containment and monitoring systems to ensure protection. (a) Major aquifer recharge areas (b) Areas of permeable strata and soils (c) Areas where the existing groundwater has beneficial uses as described in the Basin Plan. Facilities with subsurface storage or treatment must be sited, designed and operated to ensure that hazardous materials will be a mi ,imum of five the tension-saturated zone. Comments The first sentence has been modified to avoid siting facilities within areas designed and operated as aquifer recharge areas It is understood that the entire forebay contributes to the groundwater basin, but specific areas have been developed and are operated to augment natural groundwater replenishment Examples in the Orange County groundwater basin are Anaheim lakes Santa Ana River bed and Santiago gravel pits These areas have been 'structured" to maximize groundwater replenishment The section from 'Facilities may locate in the Basin Plan." could be considered permitting criteria The requirement of siting facilities with a minimum of five feet of unsaturated soil has been changed to the siting of facilities above the tension -saturated zone The tension -saturated zone is the term gaining acceptance over the use of the term capillary fringe It is that zone above the groundwater interface where water completely fills the pore space and is held there by the interaction of the size of the pore space and the surface tension of water Within this zone the same liquid -liquid transport of contaminants and chemical reactions can occur as in the saturated zone The thickness of the tension - saturated zone ranges from a few centimeters in sands to as much as 30 meters in certain clays The thickness of the tension -saturated zone would be determined during an initial site assessment In addition experience gained through the underground tank program has shown that the failure of underground tanks is highest in high groundwater areas This stipulation recognizes that fact by requiring avoidance of high - 6 - groundwater areas Residuals repositories Repositories are prohibited from locating in principal recharge areas to regional aquifers as defined in local or state plans including the Forebay area Repositories are prohibited in areas of high permeability (such as sand and gravel) per the requirements of the State Water Quality Control Board and California Code of Regulations Title 23 Subchapter 15 Section 2531(b) Repositories may locate only where the uppermost water- bearing zone or aquifer is mineralized (by natural or man- induced conditions) to the extent that it is not considered for beneficial use by the Basin Plan Repositories must be sited designed and operated to ensure that hazardous materials will always be a a_..imam of _.. -feet above the tension- saturated zone high..ot atntieipated _1evat;et. e£ Comments Orange County s experience with repositories of hazardous materials indicaup that they leak. Orange Coudtr is dependent on its groundwater to meet immediate needs and to provide protection from drought Protection of the Forebay area from potential contamination from residual repositories is important. Residual repositories are not excluded from Orange County since they may locate above non water -bearing areas and areas where the upper most water bearing zone has no beneficial uses as described in the Basin Plans The de minimus requirement of locating five feet above highest anticipated elevation of groundwater has been changed to locating above the tension - saturated zone This change is incorporated to recognize the importance of liquid -liquid transfer of hazardous materials z3 The following provides an overview of Orange County's project review process The tasks are grouped under general category headings for simplification of presentation. In fact, each process will involve a number of additional steps depending on the specific project proposal along with Planning Commission and/or Board of Supervisors review and approval ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT PROCESSES (one of the following) Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Categorical Exemption DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL PROCESSES (one or more of the following) General Plan Amendment Zone Change Conditional Use Permit or Site Plan NON -DISCRETIONARY PERMIT PROCESSES (requires all of the following) Grading Permit Building Permits Building Inspection 0 County of Orange DATE: 7 CT 0 1220 TO: Karen Peters Manager Hazardous Materials Program FROM: George Britton, Acting Manager Advance Planning SUBJECT. Mapping Cr'eeria Clarification - Hazardous waste Management Plan In response to questions from Department of Health Services (DHS) representatives during our meeting of October 3 1990 Bob Aldrich of my staff researched the criteria used in generating the composite maps in the proposed Orange County Hazardous Taste Management Plan. The following provides additional specificity as co the mapping procedures used for both the 'Residual Repositories' and the 'Treatment Recycling and Collection Facilities' General Study Area Haps The 'Residual Repositories' and "Treatment Recycling and Collection Facilities' General Study Area Maps were generated using a base map and appropriate overlay maps co screen out areas clearly constrained by the selected mappable criteria. As stated in the proposed hazardous waste plan, the general c--ror,a utilized for the "Residual Repositories" map were as follows ata) ATTACHMENT I; '- o Areas within 2,000 feet of existing or zoned residential development based on projected 1995 buildout data. o Areas within 200 feel' of active earthquake faults o Open space areas including national forest state, and regional parks designated open space, and prime agricultural land o Military installations o Areas vithin 100 -year floodplain and dam inundation areas o Areas of high groundwater (eater level 5 feet from surface) o Areas subjec to potential rapid geologic change, including landslides mudflows liquefacr_on, or soil subsidence The general cr•teria utilized for the 'Treatment Recycling and Collection Facilities' map included the following• o Areas in existing residential use or zoned for residential use using 1995 projected residential buildout data. Areas within 200 feer of active earthquake faults per State Alquist-?nolo Special Study Zones Open space areas including national forests state and regional parks designated open space land and prime agricultural land .e•� ieeimeni Eal r 5111itary installations In addition to these general categories staff developed additional mapping criteria to address those areas within the County with potential for landslide liquerac .on expansive soils mudflov or seismic activity To the best of my knowledge these criteria were used in the generation of the 'Residual Repostcor+es' General Study Area Map only o Areas indicated on the "landslide' overlay map with a moderately high, high or very high potential for landslide activity were screened out o Areas indicted on potentia: and all Areas indicated on high potential for were screened out the "liquefaction' overlay map areas of soil gas accumulation the "expansive soils' overlay soils expansion and potential All areas subject to mudflows were screened out with high liquefaction were screened out map with a moderate or peat deposit areas indicated on the 'mudflov" overlay map o Areas indicated on the "seismic' overlay map with moderate or high seismic potential were screened out During the October 3rd meeting DHS officials also inquired whether the San Juan Creek and Aliso Creek Basins (as shown on the 'groundwater' overlay map) include groundwater recharge areas Upon staff review of the County's General Plan Resources Element staff has determined that these basins do not contain groundwater recharge areas The Santa Ana Riverbed between Katella Avenue and Imperial Highway is the principal recharge area for the coastal plain. Lastly a recommendation was made by DHS to include a flowchart depicting the required steps necessary for an applicant to secure government agency approvals for siting a treatment or residual repository facility (DHS specifically sited the flowchart in the San Bernardino plan as an example to follow ) For your review I have enclosed a flowchart of the BMA development review tasks If this chart is too detailed for use within the Hazardous Vaste Plan let s discuss what level of simplication is necessary and my staff will assist in is preparation. I hope that this provides the necessary background information on the mapping criteria used ,n generating the composite maps as well as other issues raised by DHS. If you have any additional questions or wish to discuss this further please contact Bob Aldrich at 834-2166 George Britton BA.tk 010091435021' ATTACHMENT III V W 0 0 CC a Q J 0- 'H V 5r W 0- Cw 0 I Q o_ H 0 0 9 19 Y }H 0 cc 0 0 cc au 0z w. z O ___ new i0E 0 Lrj 6 0Ct 0 UC z> c z 0 0 z = c_ C O• o< 0i LWV zo um 0 O a o _ : ., .G - <0n :: Zr.W 3V V2 V<0 0<0 .w .c cG a 01 I/ fit Lu • 0 iu a. u 0 0 i00a LJJWei ATTACHMENT IV '+ O N n5.4 0 m ', i G) w c a L o o U w u C. a 0 m 0 0 N la 9 - O o. a - E u 9.0 O P3 9 d\ C. CO > M C m E 0 C a L - > 0) y 9 O 6 0 = m 0) 03 C N y Ri ti m 0 c 0 Lc L LC"I c d w c 3 a mm >.c LO f CO a E u a N 0 a m L 0 U 0. 0 a 3 0 67 0 a M0. o a > 0 u a 0 L L N d U u W 6 0 U V 0) LO GC 0 a C 011-1 F G m 6 se.1 cz: 0 Z 4.2 ; ' I I I 11 I 2C 0 o z Q w zE0` oW zw 000 p0 cc -0 --o�z ait sic C 2 oV C V. 0 CC 11.11 C. 0