HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 13-93RESOLUTION NO.., ~ ~ ' 9 ~
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SOURCE
REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT AND
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT AND
CERTIFYING THE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT ~RnATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Act
of 1989 mandates that each city and county in the State of
California adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element and a
Household Hazardous Waste Element as part of those jurisdictions'
Integrated Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, these Source Reduction and Recycling and
Household Hazardous Waste Elements are to contain programs designed
to reduce the generation and disposal of solid waste and household
hazardous waste; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield has prepared a proposed
Source Reduction and Recycling Element and a proposed Household
Hazardous Waste Element, copies of which are on file with the City
Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City, in conjunction with the County of
Kern, has prepared a Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR")
that specifically addresses the potential environmental impact of
the City's Source Reduction and Recycling and Household Hazardous
Waste Elements; and
WHEREAS, this PEIR was considered by city staff in its
preparation of this project and a copy of the PEIR is on file with
the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, as part of the PEIR, staff has prepared and
furnished to this Council a document entitled, "Mitigation
Monitoring Reporting Plan for the Unincorporated Area and
Incorporated Cities of Kern County - Source Reduction and Recycling
Elements/Household Hazardous Waste Elements ("Mitigation Plan"),"
which is dated June 1992, and which is on file with the City Clerk
and with the Sanitation Department; and
WHEREAS, on October 20, 1992, the Kern County Board of
Supervisors certified the Program Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, the significant environmental effects identified
in the PEIR, with proposed findings for consideration by this
Council in relation to said significant environmental effects for
the purposes of Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and setting forth
evidence in support of these proposed findings are set forth in
Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set
forth herein; and
ORtG~,~-~L
WHEREAS, on November 13 , 1992, the Solid Waste
Management Advisory Committee (County-wide Integrated Waste
Management Planning Task Force) recommended the adoption of the
Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous
Waste Element; and
W~EREAS, staff has prepared a report recommending that
this Council make the findings set forth in Exhibit "A" and adopt
the proposed Source Reduction and Recycling and Household Hazardous
Waste Elements, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk and
is available for examination during regular business hours; and
W~A~atEAS, the City Clerk has caused notice to be duly
given of a public hearing in this matter in accordance with law;
and
W/~..REAS, in accordance with Section 41793 of the Public
Resources Code of the State of California and Section 18766(b) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, this Council held
a duly noticed public hearing at which the matter of the proposed
adoption of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element and
Household Hazardous Waste Element and ~he proposed certification of
the PEIR were heard; and
WHEREAS, at this public hearing, the Council duly
considered the proposed Source Reduction and Recycling Element and
the Household Hazardous Waste Element, the information contained in
the PEIR, the adequacy and scope of the PEIR and the report and
recommendations of staff, and all interested persons were given the
opportunity to address, and were heard by the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND AND RESOLVED by the Council
of the City of Bakersfield as follows:
1. The foregoing is true and correct and incorporated
herein.
2. The applicable provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City
of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly
observed.
3. This Council hereby makes and adopts the findings'
with respect to each significant environmental effect set forth in
Exhibit "A" pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines
(Title 14, California Code of Regulations) and Section 21081 of the
Public Resources Code (CEQA) and declares that it considered the
evidence described in connection with each such finding.
- 2 -
4. The PEIR is complete and adequate in scope and has
been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA
Guidelines and the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation
Procedures, and that this Council has fully reviewed and considered
the information in the PEIR with respect to the subject of this
Resolution.
5. The proposed Source Reduction and Recycling Element
and Household Hazardous Waste Element contain programs designed to
reduce the generation and disposal of solid waste and hazardous
waste.
6. Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, the proposed Source
Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste
Element are hereby adopted.
7. The City Clerk shall cause a Notice of Determination
to be filed with the Kern County Clerk and shall also cause a copy
of this Resolution and notice to be sent to the Kern County Waste
Management Department.
.......... o0o ..........
- 3 -
ORIGINAL
I ~RwEBy CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed
and adopted by the Council of ~ ~t~of Bakersfield at a regular
meeting thereof held on - , by the following
vote:
CITY CLERK and Ex OffiCio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
BOB PRICE
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield
LCM/meg
Attachment
Exhibit
RECYCLE\ADOPTPGM. R-2
~/~/~
- 4 -
ORIG!NAL
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
TO: County Clerk FROM: City of Bakersfield
1415 Truxtun Avenue 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources
Code.
Project Title: Programmed Environmental Impact Report for the Source Reduction and Recycling
Elements/Household Hazardous Elements
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse)
91072054
Contact Person:
Gregg R. Strakaluse
Telephone Number:
(805) 861-2159
Project Location: Kern County and Incorporated Cities
Project Description: The Programmed EIR identifies potential environmental impacts that are likely to occur as
a result of implementing the proposed waste reduction and diversion programs contained within each
jufisdictions's Source Relducfion and Recycling Element and Household HaTardous Waste Element.
This is to advise that the Kern County Board of Supervisors has approved the above-described project and has made
the following determinations regarding the above-described project:
1. The project will have a significant effect on the environment.
~ will not
2. X An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at the Kern County Waste
Management Department, 2700 "M' Street, Suite 500, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
3. Mitigation measures X were made a condition of the approval of the project.
were not
4. A Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted for this project.
X was not
5. The City of Bakersfield concurs with the certification of the Envir~q~r~ntal Ir~pact
Report by the Board of Supervisors on October 20, l~j~ ~__~,
Date Project Approved January 20, 1993
Resolution No. 13-93
Date Received for Filing
Signature
Title
Date: ,,a-- r/- ~..~
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
County of Kern
TO: Waste Management Department FROM: City of Bakersfield
2700 "~' Steeet, Suite 500 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
SUBJECT: FHing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources
Code.
Project Title: Programmed Environmental Impact Report for the Source Reduction and Recycling
Elements/Household Hazardous Elements
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse)
91072054
Contact Person:
Gregg R. Strakaluse
Telephone Number:
(805) 861-2159
Project Location: Kern County and Incorporated Cities
Project Description: The Programmed ElR identifies potential environmental impacts that are likely to occur as
a result of implementing the proposed waste reduction and diversion programs contained within each
jurisdicfions's Source Relduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element.
This is to advise that the Kern County Board of Supervisors has approved the above-described project and has made
the following determinations regarding the above-described project:
1. The project will have a significant effect on the environment.
~ will not
2. X An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
__ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at the Kern County Waste
Management Department, 2700 'M" Street, Suite 500, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
3. Mitigation measures X were made a condition of the approval of the project.
were not
4. A Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted for this project.
~ was not
5. The City of Bakersfield concurs with the certification of the Envir~j~ntal In~oact
Report by the Board of Supervisors on October 20 199~2~_~ .~_,_~
Date Project Approved January 20, 1993
Resolution No. 13-93
Date Received for Filing
Signature
TRle
Date: ,~
EXHIBIT "A"
SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT
FOR
THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Findings of Fact Pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The City of Bakersfield is proposing to adopt the Source Reduction and Recycling
Element (SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) as part of their City
Integrated Waste Management Plan. The adoption of the SRRE and HHWE is a discretionary
action by a Public Agency and is therefore considered a "project" under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code
21000 et seq., the County and incorporated cities have prepared and certified an EIR that satisfies
the requirements of CEQA. The EIR identified certain adverse environmental impacts that could
result from some of the waste management programs proposed in the SRRE and HHWE.
To comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091, prior to adoption of the SRRE and HHWE, the City is required to make written
findings explaining how the significant environmental impacts of the project and each alternative
identified in the EIR was resolved. Under Section 15091, the City must make one of the
following findings for identified impacts and alternatives:
That changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project,
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in
the EIR;
That such changes or alternatives are within the purview and jurisdiction of another
public agency, and such changes have been or should be adopted by that other agency;
or,
That specific economic, social, or other consideration make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative
record.
9339S.A
It is the intent of the Program EIR and the accompanying mitigation measures to
address the potential impacts that may result from the waste management projects described in
the City's SRRE and HHWE.
Site-specific development proposals for the programs recommended by the
SRRE/HHWE are not yet available for review. Due to the absence of project location and design
information, the environmental impacts that were identified in the EIR are those impacts that
would be likely to occur from the implementation of the proposed projects. The mitigation
measures that have been included in the EIR are measures that should be capable of reducing the
identified "typical" impacts that may result from the implementation of the recommended
projects.
Once the specific design and location of a proposed facility is known, subsequent
environmental review pursuant to the requirements of section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and
additional mitigation maybe required. If a significant and unavoidable impact were to be
identified, a "statement of overriding considerations" must be adopted for the project in
accordance with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines section 15093.
1.1
SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
1.1.1 Programs
The Source Reduction Component of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element
(SRRE) contains several programs designed to avoid the creation of waste, rather than managing
it after it has been generated. Programs identified as having the potential to result in significant
environmental impacts include Rate Structure Modification Program to increase the incentive for
reducing waste generation and disposal of solid waste at county landfills by instituting variable
can rates.
1.1.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts which may result from the Source Reduction Programs are
safety and nuisance issues. The rate structure modification programs have the potential for the
following impacts:
Safety and Nuisance
Visual impacts from improperly disposed solid waste.
Fire hazard from the stockpiling of illegally disposed materials such as tires and yard
waste. Improperly disposal of dangerous materials, sharp objects or white goods that may pose
a threat to humans, pets or wildlife.
9339S.A
2
ORIG!NAL
Illegally disposed of motor oil, other household hazardous wastes that may be
contained in residential solid waste, and hard to dispose of items such as white goods that contain
chlorinated fluorocarbons. These substances have been linked to the depletion of the earth's
ozone layer.
Emissions from vehicle queuing and potential traffic impacts if waste hauling vehicles
are forced to wait in a public road right-of-way prior to paying a disposal fee.
1.1.3 Mitigation Measures
If subsequent environmental review determines that implementation of the proposed
waste management program would result in significant environmental impacts, then the identified
mitigation measures or equivalent performance standards would be required. The following
mitigation measures will be implemented as specific programs are instituted along with any
additional environmental review required by each specific program.
Safety and Nuisance
To reduce project impacts of increased public waste hauling and potential of illegal
dumping of solid waste, the City should require a mandatory collection program. The mandatory
collection program should assess a base fee for minimum collection and implement a variable
can rate to reduce disposal of recyclable materials. Additional suggestions include:
The implementation of rate structure modification programs should be widely
advertised prior to initiation. Increases in fees should be implemented in a phased
manner with an appropriate noticing period to minimize potential economic hardship
that may induce illegal dumping.
Criteria should be established for determining if revised refuse collection and disposal
rates have the potential to result in economic hardship. If a household or commercial
use meet the criteria and/or can demonstrate that other source reduction/recycling
activities are being implemented, increased fees could be modified or waived.
If the mandatory hauling program is not found to be feasible, a program should be
established to have commercial haulers pay reduced rates at landfills to discourage individuals
from hauling their own waste.
In conjunction with project implementation, a program to discourage illegal disposal
of solid waste should be initiated. The program should include measures such as continuing to
post signs near areas of previous illegal dumping. Public education and announcement programs
on effects of illegally disposed waste and fines and penalties for individuals found to be
disposing of waste illegally.
9339S.A
3
ORIG~:AL
The area surrounding landfills should be inspected regularly by landfill personnel for
illegal disposal activity. Illegally disposed of wastes should be properly disposed of promptly
after discovery.
Landfill operation hours should be posted in Spanish and English. Operational hours
should be provided in local phone books under several headings along with 24-hour informational
number for inquires of operational hours and types of wastes accepted. Seasonal changes in
landfill hours should be noted in advance and reflected by signs and other informational services.
The City should sponsor an annual collection event to pick up hard to dispose of items
that would otherwise be subject to additional disposal fees if brought directly to the landfill.
Items that could be collected under this program may include: furniture, white goods, mattresses,
bulk yard wastes, etc.
Implementation of a regulatory program that would place the disposal of hard to
dispose on manufacturers and/or distributors. This program, if feasible, would help reduce
impacts from the illegal disposal of hard to dispose of items.
Standard rate information should be provided to commercial haulers in advance of
program implementation to avoid delays at the collection area. Adequate queuing area should
be provided for waste haulers from the nearest public right-of-way to the collection area. The
length of the stacking area should be based on peak traffic volumes typically encountered at the
landfill. If scales are not available at a landfill, disposal fees should be based on vehicle type,
rather than weight.
1.1.4 Findings
The safety and nuisance impacts identified by the EIR for the Source Reduction
Component can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of a
mandatory collection program, rate structuring, special collection programs, and the implementa-
tion of education, regulatory and enforcement programs. Implementation of the mitigation
measures listed in Section 1.1.3 or equivalent performance standards would reduce the identified
impacts to a less than significant level.
1.2
RECYCLING COMPONENT
1.2.1 Programs
The Recycling Component of the SRRE contains programs designed for the collection
and purchasing of recyclable materials. Programs identified as having the potential to result in
significant environmental impacts included drop-off centers and materials recovery facilities.
9339S.A
4
OR G!N,~L
1.2.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the proposed recycling programs are summarized below:
Noise
The recycling centers may generate significant levels of noise. Baling and compacting
operations of a MRF satellite buy-back center may generate significant levels of noise. Traffic
and other site operational noise may also disturb residences if located adjacent to the project.
Short-term construction activities could generate significant noise levels from site preparation and
construction activities. Long-term impacts could occur from exhaust fans, trucks and automobiles
that deliver and empty waste containers, shipping out recovered material, and heavy equipment
used to segregate and process waste materials.
Aesthetics
The collection and storage of paper, glass, aluminum and other recyclable materials
at drop-off centers has the potential to result in unsightly conditions. The Material Recovery
Facility/Transfer Station (MRF/TS) structures may have a negative aesthetic effect to the project
area.
Land Use
Drop-off centers and MRFs have the potential for noise, aesthetic, and transportation
impacts that may contribute to land use conflicts with sensitive receptors in the area. Additional
land use impacts could occur from light and glare ff operated after daylight hours. The proposed
MRF/TS, if located in an area incompatible with surrounding land uses or is inconsistent with
the General Plan and/or zoning designation, could have land use impacts.
Air
Short-term construction activities would result NOx, CO, 03, S02, and PM~o emissions
that may be significant. Long-term operational activities that may result in air quality impacts
include: the discharge of solid waste onto a tipping floor; the sorting and separation of waste
materials; the storage of solid waste on-site; and the use of vehicles and machinery to separate,
process, and transport residual and recovered material. Additional air quality impacts could occur
from employee vehicle trips, transporting waste to a MRF, and transporting recyclable materials
to market.
93395.A
5
Earth
If a MRF/TS was located in an area subject to geologic hazards, the project may be
subject to significant structural and safety impacts.
Water
Water resources have the potential to be impacted by the proposed MRF/TS by on-site
runoff and percolation of waste or waste byproducts to water resources. Project-related impacts
resulting from direct groundwater withdrawal or the obstruction of groundwater recharge may
also result.
Biology
Construction of a MRF could remove or disturb biologic resources. These effects may
take the form of direct impacts which include habitat loss and fragmentation, inU:oduction of
barriers to movement, and the conversion of plant communities to a developed condition.
Indirect impacts may also occur from light intrusion, noise disturbances, changes in water
resources and environmental degradation.
Transportation
Impacts would be dependent upon the capacity of the projects site's roadways and
intersections. Significant impacts are more likely to occur in areas where roadways and
intersections are operating at or near unacceptable levels of service.
Cultural Resources
site.
The MRF/TS construction activities may impact archaeological resources at the project
Risk of Upset/Human Health/Safety
Risk of upset and human health impacts associated with a MRF/TS include potential
impacts from storage of solid waste; exposure to dust, noise, and hazardous waste that is
inadvertently deposited in the solid waste sUeam, the potential for fire and vectors.
Public Services
9339S.A
Operation of a MRF/TS and the temporary storage of solid waste and recyclable
materials has the potential to result in fire suppression impacts and a safety hazard to the public,
project employees, and fire department personnel. Utility impacts may occur if infrastructure is
required.
6
9339S~
1.2.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented as specific programs are
instituted along with any additional environmental review required by each specific program.
The City of Bakersfield will be responsible for the environmental review of any programs within
their jurisdiction.
Noise
Recycling centers should not be located adjacent to residential areas or other noise
sensitive uses. Locating these facilities in commercial or industrial areas or in areas with
substantial setbacks from noise sensitive uses (i.e., parks, undeveloped areas, etc.) would
minimize potential noise impacts.
MRF/TS operational activities should be conducted indoors whenever feasible. If
necessary, activities in outdoor areas that have the potential to produce significant noise levels
(i.e., heavy equipment to sort materials, equipment used to load materials for transport from the
centers, etc.) should be restricted to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
The MRF/TS facilities should be located in an area away from sensitive receptors. If
this is found infeasible, project operations should be set back from the property boundary at a
distance that would reduce significant noise impact to adjacent uses.
A hearing conservation program for employees should be implemented at the facility.
Traffic routes should avoid residential areas.
All construction equipment should be properly maintained and provided with functional
mufflers to limit noise.
Aesthetics
Collected materials should be transported from the collection site on a regular basis.
The out-haul schedule should be adjusted as necessary to ensure that adequate storage area is
provided and at that least some limited "back-up" storage capacity is provided to accommodate
periods when more than anticipated material may be collected.
The collection center owner/operator's name and phone number should be submitted
to the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) or other appropriate agency. In the event that litter or
other unsightly conditions develop at the site, appropriate clean-up enforcement actions should
be implemented by the LEA.
The storage of collected recyclable materials should be conducted within approved
structures or containers, or screened from public view by fences, walls, or other visual buffers.
7
ORIG:i~L
9339S.A
Any litter or recyclable material that accumulates outside of designated storage or
collection areas should be removed at the end of, and prior to, the start of each day the center
is in operation.
Visual screens located between project sites and adversely affected view corridors
should be provided. Visual screens may include fences, walls, berms, and landscaping.
Any outdoor waste processing activities should be conducted during daylight hours to
minimize the need for site lighting.
All outdoor lighting should be oriented towards the project site and should provide
light intensities that would not result in significant off-site light and glare impacts.
The MRF/TS project should not store municipal solid waste or recovered material in
areas of high visibility to the general public. The perimeter of the project site should be fenced
and patrolled frequently to collect any accumulation of litter.
Land Use
Drop-off centers should be located in commercial, industrial, or other areas set back
from residential uses. Access to recycling centers should be from arterial or other major
roadways. If exterior lighting is required, minimal site lighting should be provided. This lighting
should be oriented towards the project interior, away from surrounding land uses.
If MRF operations have the potential to result in significant land use conflicts with
nearby land uses, to the extent feasible, all materials recovery and storage operations should be
conducted within structures. The MRF should provide adequate setbacks from the project site
boundary and nearby land uses to minimize the adverse effects of noise, dust, pests, and odor
impacts. If traffic or MRF project operation noise have the potential to result in land use
conflicts with surrounding land uses, project operation hours should be restricted to the hours of
7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
Air
If MRF/TS project-related short-term construction impacts caused by fugitive dust and
equipment exhaust have the potential to exceed Federal, State or regional standards, the following
mitigation measures should be implemented:
· The construction site should be watered to reduce dust generation; watering should
be increased when winds exceed 15 miles/hour,
Cease grading operations during periods of high winds (i.e., when wind speeds
exceed 30 mph, or gusting winds with excessive visible dust production);
ORIGI~':AL
· Establish an on-site speed limit for construction vehicles of 15 mph;
· Cover or use chemical dust suppressors on stockpiled soil to prevent the
generation of dust;
· Cover h'ucks during transportation of excess dirt;
Use low sulfur diesel fuel (0.05 percent by weight); properly maintain and operate
all construction equipment; turn off gasoline fueled engines when not in use for
more than 5 minutes;
· Schedule construction-related vehicle trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak
hour emissions.
The following measure should be required to reduce potential long-term air quality
impacts generated during project activities:
Project operations such as dumping and preliminary sorting of waste materials
should be conducted on an indoor concrete tipping floor, and PM~o emissions
should be removed from the ambient air of the processing building by a f'dtered
ventilation system.
· Locate project site in an appropriate area away from sensitive receptors.
· If odor impacts are found to be significant the materials recovery facilities should
limit the volume of waste that can be stored at one time at the facility.
Any air emissions generating equipment used at the material recovery facility
would be required to use BACT to reduce CO, SO2, and NOx emissions. The
project may be required to implement LAER technology if KCAPCD thresholds
are exceeded.
Minimize the number of solid waste and recovered material hauling trips by using
the largest vehicle practicable and ensuring that the vehicle capacity is utilized
efficiently.
Implement a transportation demand management plan which would schedule trips
during non-peak hours and would encourage employee participation in alternative
transportation.
9339S.A
9
ORIGINAL
9339S.A
Earth
Prior to selecting MRF/TS site, the site should be evaluated for the presence of severe
seismic or geologic hazards. Areas subject to ground rupture, severe soils hazards, or slope
instability should be avoided.
A geotechnical or soil engineering investigation should be performed at the proposed
project site prior to construction activities. The results and recommendations from the
investigation should be incorporated into the project design.
The grading plan for the proposed project is required to be consistent with the
jurisdiction issuing a grading permit. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the appropriate
jurisdicfion's planning department should review grading plans and make recommendation for
erosion control if necessary.
The MRF/TS should be constructed in accordance with standards specified in the
Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Water
Prior to the start of operations of the materials recovery facility, baseline water quality
conditions should be established to accurately assess potential facility impacts. Potential project
sites located in significant groundwater recharge areas, high groundwater areas, or areas with
drainage problems should be avoided.
The tipping floor should be sealed to minimize infiltration of waste-related fluids. Any
washing of the tipping floor should be minimized. When cleaning of the tipping floor is
required, the floor should be swept or steam cleaned to minimize water use and the generation
of industrial waste water.
Project operations and municipal solid waste storage should be conducted in covered
or enclosed structures.
No floor drains should be located in the tipping floor and the tipping floor should be
inspected periodically for cracks or other defects. If cracks are found they should be repaired
immediately.
The project should not be located in an area of significant flooding (such as 100-year
flood areas) or where a watercourse may be affected.
A surface runoff water quality control plan should be prepared prior to material
recovery operations. This could include measures such as installing sediment traps; using and
properly maintaining retention basins to promote settlement of pollutants prior to discharge of
water.
10
ORIG~J^L
Biology
Prior to project approval, a biologic survey of the proposed project site should be
conducted to determine if any sensitive plant or animal taxa or communities/habitats or wildlife
corridors would be adversely impacted by the project. Endangered species surveys should be
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
and the California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and/or Fish and
Wildlife Setvice.
If significant biologic resources are identified at the project site, appropriate mitigation
measures would be required. This may include: replacing lost trees or habitat at an appropriate
ratio, trapping and/or transplanting sensitive species, and obtaining appropriate permits from the
California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and/or Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Indirect impacts to sensitive habitats on adjacent parcels could be reduced by
maximizing the distance between the new facility and significant biologic resources, minimizing
site lighting, controlling site runoff and the potential for spills or leaks, and minimizing noise
disturbances.
Transportation
Project operation hours and employee shifts should be scheduled to minimize the
generation of vehicle trips during peak traffic hours. Project operation between the hours of
9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. would substantially reduce peak hour trips.
Since project specific information is not provided in the SRRE, the applicant for the
project should be responsible for installing any required road improvements, such as additional
road right-of-way, turn lanes, etc., necessary for safe project site ingress/egress as well as
adequate on-site circulation.
Cultural Resources
A Phase I archaeologic study should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities
to determine if archaeological resources are present on the project site. If archaeological
resources are discovered, the project shall conform to the recommendations of the archaeological
report.
If no archaeological resources are discovered from the Phase I analyses, the following
mitigation measure would reduce the potential for project-related grading activities from
inadvertently impacting any previously undetected archaeologic resources. In the event
potentially significant archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work in that area
shall be stopped or redirected until a qualified archaeologist and native American representative
9339S.A
11
are retained to evaluate the find. Remains shall be treated pursuant to City, County and State
Archaeological Guidelines.
Risk of Upset/Human Health/Safety
All material recovery facility employees should receive training in MRF/TS operations
and safety prior to start up of job duties. Annual medical examination may be appropriate for
employees that work with or near waste material.
MRF/TS employee stations should be set up to avoid awkward repetitive motions. A
trained industrial hygienist should be retained to review employee work stations.
Employee protection equipment including the use of gloves, goggles, boots, and ear
plugs should be enforced as appropriate.
Careful placement of safety switches and guardrails should be optimized and
emergency buttons should be placed on heavy equipment and conveyor and balers. Safety classes
should be conducted on these operations.
Only employees of the MRF shall be allowed on the tipping floor or near hauler drop-
off areas.
Dust levels within a processing building should be minimized by periodically sweeping
the tipping floor and other appropriate "housekeeping" measures.
Fugitive dust levels can be controlled by conducting recovery operations in an enclosed
structure. The ventilation system for the building should create a slightly negative air pressure
to minimize the migration of dust from the building. The ventilation system should provide
filters to remove dust from the air.
All employee work station areas should be reviewed and approved by an industrial
hygienist to ensure that adequate ventilation will be provided.
All roadways and project areas (i.e., outdoor storage areas) regularly traversed by
vehicles should be provided with a permanent surface to control dust generation.
Circulation within the MRF/TS project sites should be designed to segregate
commercial waste haulers and other heavy duty vehicles from the general public traffic utilizing
the facility for waste drop off and recycling services.
Access to the tipping floor and waste processing areas by the general public should be
restricted.
9339S.A
12
Fire suppression equipment, such as building sprinklers, on-site hydrants, fire
extinguisher, etc., as well as adequate water supplies should be provided in accordance with the
requirements of the appropriate fire prevention department.
Smoking should be prohibited at the project site. Signs should be clearly posted and
enforced.
Site equipment should be cleaned regularly and maintained as directed by the
manufacturer's operating instructions to reduce the potential of vehicle-related fires.
All fire incidents should be reported to the appropriate Fire Department and LEA.
Solid Waste loads brought to the MRF/TS project sites that are suspected to be hot or
smoldering (evidenced by odors or smoke) should be dumped away from the normal operations
area.
Adequate access to and around the processing buildings should be maintained at all
times. All roadways and outdoor storage areas should be provided with an all weather surface
for adequate site access.
After dumping waste materials on the tipping floor, the materials should be surveyed
to locate and remove visible hazardous waste that has the potential to result in significant injuw
or health effects. Additional waste screening should occur as waste material is being sorted prior
to processing.
Emergency showers and eyewash facilities should be provided throughout the facility.
Site operations would conform to employee safety requirements of Title 14, OSHA and
CAL-OSHA.
All site personnel should receive written and verbal instructions regarding procedures
for minimizing accidental exposure to hazardous waste.
Hazardous waste collected at the facility and that is recovered from the tipping floor
should be stored in an enclosed structure to minimize the potential spread of fire to or from this
area. This area should be provided with its own ftre suppression system. The design of this area
should be approved by the appropriate fire department authority.
Waste from the general public should be screened prior to disposal on the tipping floor.
An educational and enforcement program should be established with local hospitals and
medical agencies to provide a safe disposal for medical wastes.
9339S.A
13
9339S.A
All material recovery facility personnel should have on record current vaccinations
against diseases such as tetanus, polio and other diseases during employment. The materials
facility operation should monitor these vaccinations to ensure they are current during
employment.
The following mitigation measure would help reduce the potential for adverse impacts
from vectors and birds attracted to the MRFfFS project sites:
If a vector problem is identified at the site, adequate control measures as identified by
the Kern County Environmental Health Department should be implemented. Methods
such as implementing screens on air vents, windows, and main doors should be
implemented.
Standing water should not be maintained on site, nor should any landscaping
vegetation be provided that may provide nesting or breeding areas for vectors.
Landscaping that produce dense foliage for rats and other rodents should be avoided
such as Algerian ivy (Hedera canariensis or other plants such as pyracantha,
honeysuckle, juniper, shrubbery, bougalnvillea, and Himalayan blackberry) which offer
excellent nesting places should be avoided.
The materials recovery facilities should be free of inaccessible spaces (i.e., between
walls, floors, above ceilings, under floors, stairways, and cabinets) which may provide
rodent harborage.
Residual and recovered materials should not be stockpiled for extended periods of time
and, if feasible, material recovery operations should be conducted indoors.
If a vector problem does occur, a trapping and baiting program should be established
to monitor and control vectors.
An industrial hygienist should measure the noise levels to which workers are exposed
at the MRF/TS project sites. The average 8-hour time weighted average exposure for workers
should be checked for compliance with OSHA time limits per noise dose.
If a materials recovery facility is located at or near a closed or operating landfill, the
materials recovery facility structure shall be monitored periodically for methane gas infiltration.
If the proposed facility is located at landfill, the use of a landfill gas recovery system may be
necessary to reduce potential gas migration impacts.
Written and verbal training should be provided to salvage personnel to recognize
hazardous waste, and responsive procedures to implement if hazardous wastes are encountered.
All job-related accidents or health problems should be reported to the Local
Enforcement Agency.
14 ~ m
Stockpiled materials should be covered and should not be stored for long periods of
time.
9339S.A
Public Services
MRF/TS project construction and operation characteristics would be required to comply
with applicable regulations (i.e., Uniform Fire Code, local hydrant location and fire flow
requirements, etc.).
If necessary, fire sprinklers should be provided in all permanent structures.
The MRF/TS projects should be located in an area where water for domestic purposes
can be feasibly provided from a water purveyor or well. If well water is used, water for
emergency purposes could feasibly be supplemented by on-site storage tanks. The volume of
water to be stored on site should be determined by local rue prevention services.
1.2.4 Findings
The noise, aesthetics, air, earth, water, biology, transportation, cultural resources, risk
of upset/human health/safety, public services and land use impacts identified by the EIR for the
Recycling Component can be mitigated through the implementation of siting, operational, design
and regulatory requirements, along with enforcement and education programs. The implementa-
tion of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.2.3 or equivalent performance standards would
reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant level. The specific findings for these issue
areas are as follows:
Noise
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility siting and design as well as the operational guidelines as
stated above should reduce potential noise impacts to employees and surrounding land uses to
a less than significant level.
Aesthetics
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recommend-
ed. The requirements for facility design, operational guidelines and enforcement activity as stated
above would reduce potential aesthetic impacts to a less than significant level.
Land Use
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility design and siting as well as the operational guidelines as
stated above would reduce the potential land use impacts to surrounding land uses to a less than
significant level.
15 ~
9339S.A
Air
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility design, siting and operation including a transportation
demand management plan as stated above would reduce the potential short and long- term air
quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Earth
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site analysis and selection, permitting and construction as stated
above would reduce the potential geological impacts to a less than significant level.
Water
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site analysis, location and operation as stated above would reduce
the potential water quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Biology
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recommend-
ed. The requirements for site location, operation and analysis including conforming to any
additional mitigation measures generated by the additional site specific analysis as stated above
would reduce the potential biologic impacts to a less than significant level.
Transportation
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for project operation and scheduling as well as on and off site
improvements provided by specific project applicants, as stated above, would reduce the potential
traffic impacts to a less than significant level.
Cultural Resources
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site specific analysis and conforming to any additional mitigation
measures generated by that analysis in addition to stopping work if archaeological resources are
encountered would reduce the potential for archaeological impacts to a less than significant level.
Risk of Upset/Human Health/Safety
mended.
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
The requirements for facility/site design and operation, along with educational and
16 ~_
enforcement programs would reduce the potential for risk of upset/human health/safety impacts
to a less than significant level.
Public Services
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for siting, design construction and operation would reduce the
potential for impacts to public services to a less than significant level.
1.3
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
1.3.1 Facilities
The materials recommended for composting in the SRRE include yard waste, wood
waste, septic tank pumping and sewage sludge.
The proposed composting facility program was found to have the potential for
environmental impacts. The site specific location of the facility and the composting method that
would be used is not known; however, it is expected that the facility would use either windrow
composting, aerated static piles, in-vessel aerobic composting or anaerobic composting methods.
It is also unknown if the composting facility would conduct activities inside structures or if
composting activities would be conducted outside.
1.3.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the proposed composting program are summarized below:
Earth
Structures utilized for cornposting operations have the potential to be affected by
geological impacts.
Air Quality
Composting operations would have the potential to result in air quality impacts from
short-term consauction activities and long-term vehicle and operational equipment emissions, and
compost odors.
Water Resources
Groundwater and surface water quality has the potential to be impacted by composting
activities. These impacts could result from inadequate drainage, precipitation contact with the
9339S.A
17
compost material, hazardous material that may be contained in the compost material and the
addition of nitrogen. Compost operations may result in water supply impacts.
Noise
Composting operation activities have the potential to result in project-related noise
impacts from construction activities, truck traffic and operational equipment.
Biology
Biological resources may be impacted from project development resulting from the
removal of habitat or increases in dust, noise and other indirect impacts.
Aesthetics
Development of a composting facility may result in the construction of new buildings
and would introduce new activities at a project site that could have significant aesthetic impacts.
Cultural Resources
Cornposting operations have the potential to disturb five to twenty acres of land that
may contain cultural resources.
Transportation
Composting operations may result in transportation related impacts resulting primarily
from project site ingress and egress turning movements.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Composting operations have the potential for risk of upset/human health impacts
resulting from the potential for pathogens in the compost material, hazardous wastes, dust, fire
and vectors.
Public Services
The composting operations would require an adequate source of water and fire
protection services. If these services cannot adequately serve the project site, a significant impact
would occur.
9339S.A
18
9339S.A
Land Use
The composting facilities have the potential for land use impacts if sensitive receptors
are located near the project site.
1.3.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented as the program is instituted
along with any additional environmental review that is required. The City of Bakersfield will
be responsible for the environmental review of any programs within their jurisdiction.
Earth
Prior to siting a cornposting facility, the candidate site should be evaluated for the
presence of severe seismic or geologic hazards. Areas subject to ground rupture, severe soil
hazards, or slope instability should be avoided.
Geotechnical or soil engineering investigations should be performed at the proposed
project site. The results and recommendations of the investigation should be incorporated into
the project design.
If structures are proposed, the cornposting facility should be constructed in accordance
with standards specified in the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Air Quality
During construction and site preparation activities, dust contxol measures, such as site
watering, should be implemented whenever necessary.
Construction vehicles should be properly maintained and shut off when not in use. If
necessary, simultaneous use of heavy-duty construction equipment should be avoided.
Prior to project approval, site and project specific air quality analysis should be
conducted. If a potentially significant air quality impact is identified from vehicle and/or
cornposting-related emissions the following measures could be implemented:
Minimize the number of truck trips to haul compost material by using the largest
vehicle practicable and ensuring that the vehicle capacity is fully utilized.
Schedule haul trips during non-peak hours to reduce local peak hour emissions.
Conduct composting processes in enclosed structures to limit the migration of dust.
If enclosed composting is not feasible, compost material moisture content should be
at maximum optimal levels prior to turning.
19 ~--
OR,L~..: ,_
To minimize the potential for compost-related odors, the following types of control
measures could be implemented:
Use in-vessel or enclosed composting processes which allow for more control of the
composting process (i.e., mgnlafion of moisture levels and maintenance of aerobic
conditions) and could reduce the number of odor-producing upsets.
The composting operation should be designed with process gas recovery system and/or
odor control features. These may include: chemical scrubbing, adsorption with
activated carbon, biofiltration, and odor neutralization. Odor dispersion techniques
should also be used such as: exhaust stacks, maximum possible setbacks from
sensitive receptors, solid walls or barriers to increase wind turbulence and/or wind
machines.
On-site storage of material to be composted should be minimized to the extent possible
to reduce the potential for odor impacts.
If the proposed project is implemented and a chronic or occasional odor problem is
experienced, an olfactory odor monitoring program could be initiated on-site to detect
odors before they migrate off-site. This program could consist of routine inspection
of specific potential odor sources by trained operators using a scentometer. If
necessary, additional odor control devices could be utilized.
Water Resources
Prior to the start of site operations, the applicant should establish baseline water quality
conditions of the project site. The results of a baseline study should be provided to the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA).
While the facility is in operation, periodic groundwater quality tests should be
conducted. The results of samples taken from beneath the project site should be evaluated to
monitor for possible site-related contamination.
If a suspected water quality impact resulting from site operations is detected, a
verification and, if necessary, corrective action program should be implemented. All proposed
verification and corrective action programs should be approved by the RWQCB and LEA.
Immediate steps should be taken to identify and rectify the source of the contamination.
To eliminate the potential for precipitation contact with the compost material, to reduce
the volume of water needed to be applied during the cornposting operation, and to facilitate the
collection of any fluids generated by the compost material, composting operations should be
conducted in an enclosed saucture. The floor of a composting structure should be sealed to
prevent water infiltration. If enclosed composting operations are not feasible, a low permeability
liner should be installed in the composting area to minimize potential infiltration of contaminants.
20
The compost area should also be benned to minimize precipitation water contact with
the compost and to contain precipitation runoff.
Fluids collected from the compost area should be disposed of in a manner approved
by the RWQCB and LEA. This may include reapplication to the compost material and/or
discharge to a sanitary sewer in accordance with the requirements of the applicable sewage
district.
Noise
All construction equipment should be properly maintained and muffled. If necessary,
construction activities could be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays.
If project-related noise reductions are necessary to achieve off-site noise level
requirements specified by the City of Bakersfield General Plan, project operations should be
conducted indoors or utilize appropriate noise attenuation devices to minimize noise impacts.
If any outdoor activities have the potential to result in significant noise impacts to nearby
sensitive receptors (i.e., deliveries, windrow tuming, compost loading, etc.) these activities should
be conducted between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Adequate separation distance area between the project site and adjacent sensitive land
uses should be provided to reduce project-related noise impacts to a less than significant level.
The separation distance would be dependent upon anticipated traffic volumes, project equipment,
and proposed noise attenuation devices.
A hearing conservation program for project employees should be implemented at the
site, consistent with Federal and State requirements.
Biology
Prior to project approval, a biologic survey of the proposed project site should be
conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any sensitive plant or animal taxa or
communities/habitats or wildlife corridors would be adversely impacted by the project.
Endangered species surveys should be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts.
If significant biologic resoumes are identified at the project site, appropriate mitigation
measures would be required. This may include: replacing lost trees or habitat at an appropriate
ratio, trapping and/or transplanting sensitive species, and obtaining appropriate permits from the
Caiiforuia Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and/or Fish and Wildlife
Service.
9339S.A
21
Indirect impacts to sensitive habitats on adjacent parcels could be reduced by
maximizing the distance between new facility and significant biological resources, minimizing
site lighting, controlling site run-off, controlling vectors, and minimizing noise disturbances.
Aesthetics
Visual screens such as fences, walls, berms, and landscaping should be provided
between the project site and public viewing areas, or if the project has no visual screening from
a public viewing area, outdoor composting and storage areas should have a minimum 1,000-foot
setback from public madways and other public viewing locations.
The architectural design of a composting building, if proposed, should provide design
features and materials compatible with surrounding development.
The project site should be maintained daily to remove litter and debris. Material to
be composted should not be stockpiled in highly visible area.
Cultural Resources
A Phase I archaeologic study should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities
to determine if archaeological resources are present at the project site. If archaeological
resources are discovered, the project shall conform to the recommendations of the archaeological
report.
If no archaeological resources are discovered from the Phase I analysis, the following
mitigation measure would reduce the potential for facility-related grading activities to
inadvertently impact any previously undetected archaeological resources. In the event that
archaeological artifacts are encountered during grading or construction activities, work in that
area should be stopped or redirected until a qualified archaeologist and Native American
representative are retained to evaluate the find. Remains shall be treated pursuant to City,
County and State Archaeological Guidelines.
Transportation
If the project will utilize a presently impacted roadway or intersection, project
operation hours and employee shifts should be scheduled to avoid the generation of vehicle trips
during peak traffic hours.
The composting facility applicant should be responsible for installing any required road
improvements, such as additional road right-of-way, turn lanes, etc., necessary for safe project
site ingress/egress as well as adequate on-site circulation.
9339S.A
22
Risk of Upset/Human Health
An individual knowledgeable in composting procedures should be utilized to conduct
composting operations. Ongoing monitoring of the composting process (i.e., types and mixture
of materials being composted, temperature, moisture and oxygen levels) will minimize the
potential for upset conditions.
Samples from finished compost products should be regularly tested for the presence
of pathogens. If unacceptable levels of pathogens are detected, site operations should be
modified to ensure that composting conditions are adequate to eliminate potential health hazards.
A screening program should be developed to inspect compost material for hazardous
and other non-compostable waste. Hazardous and other unacceptable waste should be removed
prior to grinding or commencement of the cornposting process. Procedures should be established
for handling, storing, and disposing of rejected material.
If composting operations are conducted within a building, a ventilation system for the
processing building should create a slight negative air pressure within the structure to minimize
the migration of dust from the building. The ventilation system should provide filters to remove
dust from the air.
Moisture levels in the compost material should be monitored prior to turning operations
to ensure adequate moisture levels to minimize dust generation while providing a suitable
environment for the composting process.
Fire suppression equipment, such as building sprinklers, on-site hydrants, fire
extinguisher, etc., should be provided in accordance with the requirements of the appropriate fire
prevention department.
Adequate access to and around the composting and storage areas should be maintained
at all times. All roadways and outdoor storage areas should be provided with an all-weather
surface for adequate site access.
Adequate fire flows, as determined by local fire prevention authorities, should be
provided at the project site. It may be necessary to supplement existing fire flows with on-site
water storage.
Conducting composting operations in an enclosed structure would reduce potential bird
and vector impacts to a less than significant level. If outdoor composting operations are to be
implemented, vector and bird control measures approved by the LEA should be implemented.
These measures may include: minimizing the occurrence of standing water, utilizing temporary
or permanent covers over compost material to discourage birds, maintaining "good housekeeping"
measures and implementing rodent control measures as necessary.
9339S.A
23
Public Services
Project construction and operation characteristics would be required to comply with
applicable fire prevention and suppression regulations (i.e., Uniform Fire Code, local hydrant
location and fire flow requirements, etc.).
If water supply impacts have the potential to be significant, the feasibility of enclosing
or covering composting operations should be evaluated. The covering composting material would
minimize water use.
A long-term source of water for domestic purposes should be investigated to serve the
project site; adequate agriculture and/or domestic water supplies should be developed.
Land Use
If a composting operation has the potential to result in significant land use conflicts
with nearby land uses, to the extent feasible, composting operations should be conducted within
structures.
The composting facility should provide adequate setbacks from the project site
boundary and nearby land uses to minimize the adverse effects of noise, dust, pest, and odor
impacts. An appropriate setback distance would be dependent upon the type of composting
operation and adjacent uses.
If traffic or project operation noise has the potential to result in land use conflicts with
surrounding land uses, project operation hours should be restricted to the hours of 7 a.m. and
7 p.m. Project traffic should avoid residential streets.
If complaints are received regarding odor, litter, pest and vector, or other aspects of
the facility operation, appropriate actions should be taken to identify the source of the nuisance
and minimize its occurrence. All actions taken to minimize nuisance impacts and the timing for
their implementation should be reported to the Local Enforcement Agency.
1.3.4 Findings
The earth, air quality, water resources, noise, biology, aesthetics, cultural resources,
transportation, risk of upset/human health, public services and land use impacts identified by the
EIR for the Cornposting Component can be mitigated through the implementation of siting,
operational, design and regulatory requirements, along with enforcement and education programs.
The implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.3.3 or equivalent performance
standards would reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant level. The specific
findings for these issue areas are as follows:
9339S.A
24
OR G,-A,_
EaCh
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as racom-
mended. The requirements for site analysis and location as well as construction as stated above
would reduce the potential geological impacts to a less than significant level.
Air Quality
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for specific site analysis, facility design, siting, operation and
measures to control odors if complaints are received would reduce the potential short and long-
term air quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Water Resources
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site analysis, monitoring and operation would reduce the potential
water quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Noise
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility siting and design as well as the operational guidelines
would reduce potential noise impacts to employees and surrounding land uses to a less than
significant level.
Biology
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site location, operation and analysis including conforming to any
additional mitigation measures generated by the additional site specific analysis would reduce the
potential biologic impacts to a less than significant level.
Aesthetics
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility design and siting, and operational guidelines would reduce
potential aesthetic impacts to a less than significant level.
Cultural Resources
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site specific analysis and conforming to any additional mitigation
9339S.A
25
measures generated by that analysis in addition to stopping work if archaeological resources are
encountered would reduce the potential for archaeological impacts to a less than significant level.
Transportation
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for project operation and scheduling as well as on and off site
improvements provided by specific project applicants would reduce the potential traffic impacts
to a less than significant level.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility/site design, compost material testing, hazardous waste
screening and facility operations would reduce the potential for risk of upset/human health
impacts to a less than significant level.
Public Services
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for construction and operation would reduce the potential for impacts
to public services to a less than significant level.
Land Use
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility design, siting and operational guidelines would reduce
the potential land use impacts to surrounding land uses to a less than significant level.
1.4
SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT
1.4.1 Programs
The Special Waste Component program is for wastes that require special handling and
disposal. The Special Waste program evaluated in this section of the Program EIR was tire
shredding for tire derived fuel and crumb rubber for asphalt surfaces.
1.4.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the proposed special waste program are summarized below:
9339S.A
26
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Tire fires have the potential to result in the event of upset conditions. Tire collection
activities at the project site have the potential to result in human health impacts from vectors in
stockpiled materials.
Air Quality
Proposed tire programs could result in significant emissions resulting from tire
combustion activities.
Public Services
Stockpiled tires may ignite resulting in fires that are difficult to control and extinguish
and may impact the public and fire department personnel.
1.4.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented as the program is instituted
along with any additional environmental review that is required. The City of Bakersfield will
be responsible for the environmental review of activities within their jurisdiction.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The delivery of tires to processing facilities may require scheduling in advance to
minimize the need to stockpile excessive numbers of tires.
Tire stockpile size should be limited to control the amount of potential fuel in each
stockpile. This could require the creation of several small piles rather than one large stack.
Appropriate fire suppression chemicals and equipment approved by local fire
departments should be stored at the project site.
Tire stockpiles should be located away from population centers to minimize the effects
of short-term smoke and other air emission impacts on surrounding land uses.
No smoking signs should be posted around all tire stockpile areas and other possible
ignition sources should be eliminated.
9339S.A
Tires at processing facilities should be shredded as soon as possible and outdoor tire
storage areas for processing facilities should be inspected on a regular basis for the presence of
pests or vectors. If the presence of rodents or mosquito larvae are detected, appropriate
abatement procedures should be implemented. All abatement programs should be approved by
the Kern County Environmental Health Department prior to implementation.
27 D ~
93395.A
Air Quality
Industries proposing to utilize tire derived fuel, if located within the City of
Bakersfield, should be required to amend their "permit to operate" issued by the APCD. If
necessary, the project should be required to install best available control technology or purchase
emission offsets to reduce project emissions. Possible control methods for criteria and toxic
pollutants may include: control of the combustion process (i.e., temperature and air conten0,
adjustment of the amount of tire derived fuel utilized, and installation of a gas scrubbing system.
Public Services
Local fire departments that may need to respond to fires associated with stockpiled tires
should review staffing levels to insure that staffing is adequate.
Inspections of tire storage areas should be conducted on a regular basis to insure that
no proliferation of pests or vectors occurs.
1.4.4 Findings
The risk of upset/human health, air quality, and public services impacts identified by
the Program EIR for the Special Waste Component can be mitigated through the implementation
of siting, operational, design and regulatory requirements, along with enforcement programs. The
implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.4.3 or equivalent performance
standards would reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant level. The specific
findings for these issue areas are as follows:
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility siting, operation, and regulatory compliance would reduce
the potential for risk of upset/human health impacts to a less than significant level.
Air Quality
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for regulatory compliance and emission control would reduce the
potential quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Public Services
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for service assessment and inspections, would reduce the potential
for impacts to public services to a less than significant level.
28
1.5 DISPOSAL FACILITY CAPACITY COMPONENT
9339S.A
1.5.1 Programs
The City and County intend to reduce the number of landfills in Kern County and
regionalize solid waste disposal. This involves redirecting the solid waste stream from local
landfills to five regional landfills. The local landfills that are not expanded into regional facilities
would continue to accept solid waste until reaching their capacity or planned closure date. After
the local landfill are closed in accordance with applicable regulations, the landfill sites would be
operated as transfer stations that would transfer waste in packer trucks to regional landfills.
The proposed
environmental impacts.
capacities is not known.
disposal facility program was found to have the potential for
The site specific location of the facilities, method of operation, and
1.5.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the proposed Disposal Facility Capacity programs are summarized below:
Earth
The location, construction, and operation of a new or expanded landfill has the
potential for geologic impacts resulting from increased grading operations, seismic activity,
unstable slopes and landfill settlement.
Air
The regional landfill projects have the potential for air quality impacts from landf'dl
construction/operation impacts, landfill gas generation, and the transportation of solid waste.
Transfer station projects have the potential to result in air quality impacts from short-term
construction activities and transfer station operations.
Water
The location and operation of a new or expanded landfill has the potential for water
quality impacts from erosion, inadequate landfill drainage and leachate production.
Noise
The construction and operation of a regional landfill has the potential for noise impacts
to land uses adjacent to the proposed regional landfills. Noise would be generated from waste
hauling traffic and facility operation.
29
OR,G ,, _
Biology
Expansion of an existing landfill or the construction of a new facility could result in
the removal and modification of the vegetation of the project area. Impacts to wildlife could also
Occur.
Aesthetics
Continued operation of the proposed regional landfills has the potential to result in
visual impacts from extended waste disposal activities, grading operations and permanent changes
in topography.
Cultural Resources
Landfill operations require the extensive ground disturbing activities that could
adversely affect archaeological resources.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The regional landfill project has the potential for significant safety impacts to occur
from landfill activities which include landfill gas, fire, employee and user safety, hazardous
wastes, and vectors/disease.
Land Use
Land Use conflicts with surrounding land uses that have the potential to result from
new or expanded solid waste disposal operations and transfer station projects include noise, dust,
odors, litter, vectors, and pest impacts.
Transportation
Operation of the proposed transfer stations will have the potential to alter existing
waste-hauling traffic patterns and may have significant transportation impacts.
1.5.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented as programs are instituted
along with any additional environmental review required by each specific program. The City of
Bakersfield will be responsible for the environmental review of any programs within their
jurisdiction.
9339S.A
30
Earth
Plans for the expansion of regional landfills should emphasize the use of lateral
expansions to generate sufficient volumes of cover material. Vertical expansions should only be
used if adequate cover soil is otherwise available at the project site.
The landfill operator should utilize procedures which minimize the volume of soil
material required for daily cover at each of the project sites. This may include the use of
compost material or synthetic materials to supplement the use of cover soil. All alternative cover
materials must be approved and monitored by the California Integrated Waste Management Board
and the Kern County Local Enforcement Agency.
If on-site soils are utilized to construct the final landfill cap or any required liner,
imported soils or soil amendments will likely be required. Imported or amended soil should not
be utilized until it has been demonstrated by field and laboratory testing to be capable of
achieving required permeabilities. A quality control plan to ensure the proper installation of all
liner materials should be implemented.
To minimize potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts, the following
measures should be implemented at each of the Regional Landfill sites:
Vegetation within a new construction area should not be removed until the start of
landfill construction activities.
Large soil stockpiles that will not be utilized throughout the rainy season should be
seeded with grass after the first measurable rain of the season.
To minimize the potential for off-site sedimentation impacts, a sedimentation pond or
similar erosion control method should be constructed down-gradient of the landfill
prior to the start of landfill construction. All site runoff should be directed to this
pond.
Other erosion control measures, such as the use of siltation fences, apply mulch or
other ground covers, limiting the disturbance of ground surfaces until necessary for
waste disposal operations, and the use of impervious surfaces in permanent drainage
ditches, should be implemented whenever and wherever feasible.
Long-term erosion of the final landfill cover must be controlled by planting a
vegetative cover over the completed landfill.
Proposed cut slopes over ten feet in height and all waste-fill slopes should be
demonstrated to be stable during a maximum probable earthquake. Slopes should be evaluated
by a certified engineering geologist prior to the start of grading and/or filling activities.
9339S.A 3 1
Recommendations from this review should be incorporated into the final grading and/or landfill
design plans for each of the regional landfills.
Temporary and permanent surface water drainage facilities should be provided for all
cut slopes to minimize the infiltration of water. This may include benns along the top of the
slopes and other measures to avoid the accumulation of water at the base of the slopes. After
intense rainfall events, all landfill slopes should be inspected to determine if any significant slope
failures have occurred or may have the potential to occur. If necessary, corrective actions to
prevent or minimize the effects of slope failure should be implemented as quickly as feasible.
Settlement of the landfill due to waste decomposition and other factors can result in
damage to the final cover, drainage system, leachate and gas control facilities. Measures should
be incorporated into the final design of the landfill to minimize settlement damage. This may
include using flexible joints in collection pipes and providing minimum grades (i.e., three
percent) for drainage and collection structures that will not be adversely affected by small
changes in gradient.
Air
Landfill construction activities should be phased, to the extent possible, to minimize
peak equipment activity and emissions that could result in short-term air quality impacts.
Material excavated or graded should be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust. During the summer months, watering should occur at least twice
daily with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and after work is done
for the day. Water shall not be applied in quantities that will saturate the soils.
Chemical dust suppressants may also be used.
To the extent possible, clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation activities should
cease during periods of high winds (i.e., greater than 20 mph averaged over one hour)
so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations should
be minimized to prevent excessive dust generation.
Existing grasses or vegetation should not be removed until necessary.
Portions of the landfill site that will not be disturbed for an extended period of time
should be seeded prior to the rainy season so that a grass cover will be established.
On-site vehicle speed should be limited to 15 mph.
All temporary roads on the landfill surface should be watered periodically during the
day. All permanent roads should be paved.
9339S.A 32
Long-term dust impacts should be controlled by planting native grasses on disturbed
and filled areas.
A methane gas migration monitoring program should be implemented at each of the
regional landfills. This program could consist of a series of permanent monitoring wells installed
around the landfill perimeter. If significant quantifies of methane are found to be migrating away
from the landfill, appropriate control measures should be implemented. This would likely require
the installation of permanent extraction wells. If the collected methane is to be flared or
cornbusted to generate electricity, appropriate permits must be obtained from the Air Pollution
Control District.
Prior to the construction or expansion of a regional landfill, the potential for the landfill
to result in significant emissions of toxic air contaminants should be evaluated. If it is
determined that landfill emissions could potentially affect human populations near the landfill,
a health risk analysis should be prepared. This analysis should consider proposed wastestream
volumes and characteristics, meteorological conditions, characteristics of existing landfill gas
emissions, the effectiveness and/or secondary emissions from proposed control measures and the
location of potentially affected populations. If it is determined that the landfill would result in
a significant health risk, additional gas recovery and treatment programs should be proposed and
evaluated.
If transfer station project-related short-term construction impacts caused by fugitive
dust and equipment exhaust have the potential to exceed federal, state or regional standards, the
following mitigation measures should be implemented:
The construction site should be watered to reduce dust generation; watering should be
increased when winds exceed 15 miles/hour;
Cease grading operations during periods of high winds (i.e., when wind speeds exceed
30 mph, or gusting winds with excessive visible dust production);
Establish an on-site speed limit for construction vehicles of 15 mph;
Cover or use chemical dust suppressors on stockpiled soil materials to minimize the
generation of dust;
Cover tracks during transportation of excess dirt;
Use low sulfur diesel fuel (0.05 percent by weight); properly maintain and operate all
consauction equipment; tum off gasoline fueled engines when not in use for more than
5 minutes.
9339S.A 33
Air emissions from waste-hauling operations are not expected to be significant.
however, to further reduce transfer truck emissions, the following measures should be
implementexl:
Transfer vehicles should utilize the most direct route to the landfill that is feasible to
reduce total vehicle miles traveled;
Truck trips should be scheduled to avoid peak traffic hours when vehicle emissions are
at their highest;
To minimize potential odor impacts at the landfill, the following measures should be
implemented:
Transfer station locations should provide adequate setbacks from sensitive land uses
to reduce the potential for odor-related conflicts;
Organic refuse that has the potential to generate offensive odors should be removed
from the transfer station by the end of the working day.
Water
Daily and intermediate soil cover should be applied over the refuse to reduce water
infiltration.
During site operation, a network of temporary ditches and berms should be used to
divert water away from the landfill working face and excavated depressions (i.e., borrow areas
and landfill areas) to temporary and permanent drainage ditches.
During the operating life of the landfill and prior to the start of the rainy season,
depressions on the landfill surface should be leveled to minimize water ponding. All drainage
facilities should be periodically inspected and accumulations of silt, litter, or other debris
removed.
After the first significant rain of the season, the temporary and permanent drainage
systems should be inspected by site personnel to ensure that the drainage system is operating
properly.
Permanent drainage ditches at the landfill site should be constructed with concrete,
corrugated metal, PVC, or other material that will limit water infiltration and provide for the
efficient removal of water off of the project site.
Water or other fluids applied to the landfill surface for the purpose of dust control
should be used to the minimum extent needed for the adequate control of fugitive dust. At no
9339S.A 34
time should the surface soils become saturated resulting from the application of dust control
water.
Sedimentation basins should be provided with a clay and/or synthetic liner to minimize
the infiltration of ranoff water.
After the landfill reaches its design height, a final cover system would be constructed
that meets or exceeds the requirements of Title 23, Subchapter 15 of the CCR. This system
would include two feet of foundation soil, one foot of low permeability (1 x 10-6 cm/sec) clay
and one foot of soil suitable to support vegetative growth. Shallow rooted grasses would be
planted to minimize wind and water erosion and enhance evapotranspiration of inf'tltrated water.
During the operation of the landf'dl, a post-closure funding mechanism consistent with
the requirements of AB 2488 (Eastin) would be established by the Kern County Public Works
Department to provide money for the proper maintenance of the landfill and final cover.
Maintenance measures should include items such as maintaining proper surface drainage, filling
in low spots that may trap water, maintenance of the vegetative cover, repair erosion drainage,
and maintenance of drainage systems.
Final landfill grades should provide a minimum slope of three percent to facilitate the
drainage of water off of the landfill surface.
In accordance with the requirements of the Califomia Integrated Waste Management
Board, closure plans for the proposed regional landfills must be prepared and approved. Specific
items that must be addressed in the closure plan include:
Sources of soil material required to comply with closure requirements.
Measures to ensure that potential erosion impacts will be minimized.
Procedures for the maintenance of groundwater and any unsaturated zone monitoring
programs established in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 15.
Procedures for the continued operation of the leachate collection and removal system
as long as leachate is generated and detected.
Maintenance measures to ensure the continued structural integrity of all containment
structures and to maintain the final cover as necessary to correct the effects of settle-
ment, erosion or other factors.
Vertical expansions of existing landfills should be limited to the extent required to
provide gradients necessary to provide adequate drainage. Vertical expansion of an existing
landfill may be acceptable if site-specific investigations indicate that moisture levels of the
existing disposed refuse is low and that the additional weight of refuse and cover material
9339S.A 35
associated with a vertical expansion will not result in increased migration of leachate from the
landfill.
To reduce the potential for the migration of leachate from a new or expanded landfill,
a landfill liner system that meets or exceeds the minimum liner requirements contained in
Title 23, Chapter 15, of the CCR should be provided. The liner system must also include a
leachate collection and removal system. The requirement for a landfill may be waived by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board if sufficient evidence is provided that expanded waste
disposal operations will not have the potential to adversely affect water resources. This evidence
should include a landfill design and operation plan to minimize water inf'tltration into the refuse,
geologic and soil characterizations of the project site to assess the ability of natural conditions
to limit leachate migration and a water balance study to predict the volume of leachate that could
potentially be produced by the landfill.
Any collected leachate should be disposed of in a manner approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board. This may include evaporation, use of the fluid for dust control,
or disposal at a sewage treatment plant. The collected leachate should be tested periodically (at
least twice a year) to ensure that it does not contain any constituents in concentrations that would
require it to be managed and disposed as a hazardous waste. A surface impoundment (pond)
used to store leachate should be provided with a composite liner and leak detection system.
Prior to the disposal of waste in a new or expanded landfill, a groundwater monitoring
system that complies with the requirements of CCR. Tifie 23, Chapter 15, must be installed. If
a required groundwater monitoring program detects the possible presence of landfill-related
contamination in the groundwater, a verification monitoring program, as defined by Chapter 15,
must be implemented. If necessary, a corrective action program designed to remediate
groundwater contamination would also be required.
Each regional landfill should be operated utilizing a temporary and permanent drainage
system that is designed to convey runoff from a 100-year storm to a sedimentation basin. These
basins should be provided with a low permeability liner to minimize the infiltration of water and
potential production of leachate. Water should be released from the sedimentation basin at a rate
that will not result in downstream drainage impacts. All basins and drainage systems should be
maintained to periodically remove accumulated sediment.
Noise
The location of a new regional landfill should utilize an access road that does not have
existing noise receptors along it. This road should also be located beyond the eventual city limits
of the nearest community to minimize the potential for the development of noise receptors in the
future.
Landfill operators should continue the existing practice of providing landfill personnel
with heating protection devices.
9339S.A 36
If landfill construction activities require the use of additional earth-moving equipment,
the simultaneous use of construction and landfill operation equipment should be limited to the
extent necessary to not exceed a 55 dBA noise level at the nearest sensitive receptor.
The location of any new regional landf'fil should be at least one mile from residential
uses. This distance should be adequate to reduce most consmlction and landfill operation noise
impacts to a less than significant level. An increased separation distance and, if feasible, the
presence of intervening topography, would be beneficial to further limit the potential for
occasional impacts resulting from louder than normal noise levels at the landfill.
Transfer trucks hauling refuse to the regional landfills should utilize, to the extent
possible, routes that avoid population centers and other sensitive noise receptors. If truck traffic
must travel past sensitive receptors that could be adversely affected by increased traffic noise,
refuse hauling track trips should be restricted to daytime hours to avoid the more noise-sensitive
evening and nighttime hours.
Biology
Prior to any project activities that would affect the vegetation at each of the proposed
project sites, biologic surveys of the expansion areas should be performed by a qualified
biologist. All plant surveys of the expansion areas should be performed by a qualified biologist.
All plant surveys should be conducted during the springtime to obtain adequate data about the
site. Animal surveys conducted to detect the presence or potential presence of species of
concern, should be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.
If sensitive plant species are affected at any project site, salvage operations that have
been approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and the California Native Plant
Society should be conducted. The purpose of a salvage operation is to relocate sensitive plant
species to similar habitat in which the species is missing. The relocafion program must contain
provisions for the maintenance of the mitigation site until the plants are reestablished.
The loss of habitat suitable for use by the San Joaquin kit fox, blunt-nosed leopard
lizard or other species of concern could be mitigated through the protection and enhancement of
similar adjacent habitat. The location and area of replacement habitat must be approved by the
California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
If surveys for sensitive animal species determine their presence in or adjacent to the
project site, a mitigation program consistent with the California and Federal Endangered Species
Acts must be developed. Components of such a program would include conducting required pre-
constmcfion surveys, designation of a suitable mitigation area, maintenance agreements to
management the mitigation area, and removal of sensitive species from the project area.
9339S.A 37
Aesthetics
New or expanded landfills should be located in areas that will minimize views of the
facility from residential areas. This would require the maintenance or establishment of
substantial setbacks from the regional landfill to residential areas. The presence of intervening
topography between the landfill and residential areas makes an effective visual barrier and should
be utilized whenever feasible.
To minimize prominent views of the regional landfills from adjacent roadways, earthen
berms and landscaping may be utilized. Benns that are placed adjacent to roadways are an
effective visual screen, however, this type of mitigation would only be required if landf'dl
operations were to occur very close to the roadway. If screening of more distant views of landfill
activities are required, benns can be constructed along the affected perimeter of the landfill prior
to the start of each landfill lift. This type of berm would be capable of concealing much of the
landfill activity.
To minimize the potential for long-term visual impacts resulting from new or expanded
landfill operations, the closure plans for the regional landfills should require that all graded areas
be revegetated. Additionally, final cut and fill slopes should incorporate, to the extent feasible,
the use of rounded contours that are similar to surrounding topography.
Litter control measures, such as the use of portable fences, permanent perimeter fences,
periodic cleanup of the landfill perimeter and access road, and the application of dally cover,
should be continued.
Cultural Resources
A Phase I archaeologic study should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities
to determine if archaeological resources are present on the project site. If archaeological
resources are discovered, the project shall conform to the recommendations of the archaeological
report.
If no archaeological resources are discovered from the Phase I analyses, the following
mitigation measure would reduce the potential for project-related grading activities from
inadvertently impacting any previously undetected archaeologic resources. In the event that
archaeological artifacts are encountered during grading or construction activities, work in that
area should be stopped or redirected until a qualified archaeologist and Native American
representative are retained to evaluate the find. Remains shall be treated pursuant to City,
County and State Archaeological Guidelines.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Landfill gas (LFG) monitoring webs have been installed along the perimeter of the
proposed regional landfiBs. If significant quantities of gas are detected to be migrating from the
9339S.A 38
landfill, remediation measures such as installation of LFG extractions wells should be
implemented.
Any structure placed on or near the landfill should have an LFG monitoring and
exhaust system to ensure minimal LFG accumulations in and below such structures.
Soil to be used for dally cover would be available at the landfills to smother fires
which occur on-site.
Project sites and access roads should be kept clear of dry brush and vegetation.
Access roads, fire-fighting equipment, and emergency telephone numbers should be
clearly marked and readily available in active areas of the site.
Smoking should be prohibited at the project sites near or on the working face and fuel
storage area. Signs should be clearly posted and enforced.
Landfill equipment should be cleaned regularly and maintained as directed by the
manufacturer's operating instructions. Such procedures will reduce the potential of vehicle-
related fires.
The landfill working face should be kept as small as possible to minimize the amount
of exposed refuse.
All fire incidents should be reported to the appropriate Fire Department and LEA.
Hot or burning waste loads should be dumped away from the normal operations area.
The materials should be extinguished and a suitable waiting period established prior to disposal
with the existing fill.
Daily site operations would be conducted in accordance with CCR Title 14, which
requires operation and maintenance personnel to use safety equipment as determined necessary
by the LEA.
All employees should attend training programs regarding safe operating procedures.
Bottled drinking water, first-aid supplies, and emergency telephones should be
maintained at well-marked sites.
Public use of the waste management facilities should be closely monitored by trained
personnel. This would include providing clear direction regarding where waste material is to be
dumped.
9339S.A 39
Continue to enforce existing hazardous waste screening and response programs at the
regional landfills.
All personnel should attend n'aining programs regarding safe operating procedures.
Training sessions should review hazardous material response procedures.
The following phone numbers should be posted at each project site:
Spill cleanup specialists;
Local hospitals;
Police;
Ambulance; and
LEA.
The proposed project should comply with CCR Title 14, Division 7, Chapter 3,
Section 17682, which is intended to reduce potential vector impacts to insignificant levels.
Standard landfill operating procedures to limit the proliferation of vectors should include:
Land Use
Maintain as small a working face as possible to minimize the amount of exposed
refuse;
Compact the waste and apply dally soil cover;
Remove any ponded water;
Implement appropriate vector control programs approved by the LEA whenever
necessary;
Implement dust control measures to minimize fugitive dust.
COVeL
When applying dust control water, care should be taken to not saturate the landfill
In addition to the use of dally cover materials to control the release of odors from each
of the regional landfills, the following odor control measures should be implemented.
Keep the landfill working face as small as possible.
Avoid the disturbance of previously covered refuse and the exposure of waste material.
9339S.A 40
Conduct regular inspections of the landfill site for areas where soil cover is
substandard and correct deficiencies as needed. This should include repairing cracks
or holes in the cover caused by landfill operations or weather conditions.
Bury extremely odoriferous loads of refuse as quickly as possible.
Measures to control the off-site migration of litter should be continued or implemented
at the regional landfills as necessary. Litter control measures should include the following:
The application of cover material over disposed refuse at the end of, and throughout,
the day.
Permanent and temporary litter fences should be maintained downwind of the active
face of the landfill.
Perform daily cleanup of litter at and around the landfill site.
In addition to the use of daily cover material to reduce potential pest and vector
conflicts resulting from waste disposal operations at the proposed regional landfills, the following
measures should be implemented.
Maintain as small a working face as possible to minimize the amount of exposed
refuse.
Do not allow standing water to accumulate on or near the landfill.
Implement appropriate pest/vector control programs approved by the LEA whenever
necessary.
To minimize the potential for incompatible land uses to be developed adjacent to each
of the regional landfills, the County should attempt to acquire properties or development rights
that are located within a minimum of 1,000 feet from the landfill perimeter.
If the Public Works Department and/or the Enforcement Agency receive complaints
regarding nuisance impacts on property(ies) adjacent to a regional landfill site, an investigation
of the complaint should be conducwxt as soon as feasible. An on-site inspection or appropriate
investigation of the reported problem should occur within 24 hours of receiving the complaint.
If necessary, measures to alleviate the nuisance condition should be implemented. Corrective
actions that require short-term activities such as the cleanup of wind-blown or illegally dumped
refuse or covering a waste load that is causing an odor problem should be implemented as soon
as feasible. If repeated complaints occur, the Public Works Department and landfill operator
should implement long-term operational procedures to minimize future nuisance conflicts.
9339S.A 41
Transfer stations should be located at project sites that minimizes the use of roadways
that are adjacent to residential areas by project-related traffic.
Transfer vehicles used to haul waste to landfills should avoid using roadways that are
adjacent to residential uses.
Transfer stations should be set back an adequate distance from sensitive receptors to
reduce operation noise to levels consistent with the requirements of the General Plan. This would
require that project-generated noise not exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor. If adequate
setbacks cannot be feasibly provided, noise attenuating structures should be utilized and project
operations should be conducted between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm.
A heating conservation program for employees should be implemented at the facility.
During the construction of a transfer station, standard dust control measures should be
implemented. This includes watering the site to minimize fugitive dust, limiting vehicle speed
and suspending grading operations when wind conditions result in excessive dust production.
Portions of the transfer station used for waste dumping, storage or vehicle travel should
be paved.
Transfer station locations should provide adequate setbacks from sensitive receptors
to reduce the potential for odor-related conflicts.
Organic refuse that has the potential to generate offensive odors should be removed
from the transfer station by the end of the working day.
Illegal dumping or litter that accumulates in the vicinity of the transfer station should
be cleaned up on a regular basis.
Portable litter fences and permanent perimeter fences should be used to control the
migration of liter from the project site.
Signs should be posted at the transfer station regarding City requirements that waste
loads be covered while being transported.
Transfer station that are located in areas that experience frequent high winds should
utilize enclosed tipping floors to minimize the off-site migration of litter.
Refuse that would provide a food source or habitat for vectors or pests should be
removed from the project site by the end of the working day.
Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate at the project site. Landscaping
that is provided should not provide nesting or breeding areas for vectors.
9339S.A 42
If pest or vector problem is identified at the project site, adequate control measures as
identified by the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department should be implement-
ed.
Transportation
Project operation hours and employee shifts should be scheduled to minimize the
generation of vehicle trips during peak traffic hours. Minimizing truck trips between the hours
of 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. would substantially reduce potential peak hour traffic
impacts.
The project should be responsible for installing any required road improvements, such
as additional road right-of-way, turn lanes, etc., necessary for safe project site ingress/egress as
well as adequate on-site circulation.
1.5.4 Findings
The earth, air quality, water resources, biology, aesthetics, cultural resources, risk of
upset/human health, land use, and transportation impacts identified by the EIR for the Disposal
Facility Capacity Component can be mitigated through the implementation of siting, operational,
design and regulatory requirements, along with enforcement and education programs. The
implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.5.3 or equivalent performance
standards would reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant level. The specific
findings for these issue areas are as follows:
Earth
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitgafion measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site location, analysis, design, operation, and construction would
reduce the potential impacts resulting from grading and excavation activities, erosion,
earthquakes, slope stability and settlement to a less than significant level.
Air Quality
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility construction, design, monitoring/analysis, siting and
operation would reduce the potential short and long-term air quality impacts resulting from
equipment operation, dust generation, landfill gas and odors to a less than significant level.
Water Resources
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for regulatory compliance including funding, site design,
43
inspection/monitoring and operation would reduce the potential water quality impacts resulting
from inadequate drainage and leachate to a less than significant level.
Noise
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility siting, design and operation would reduce potential noise
impacts to employees and surrounding land uses to a less than significant level.
Biology
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site analysis, habitat protection and enhancement, species
relocation and required mitigation programs consistent with the California and Federal
Endangered Species Acts would reduce the potential biologic impacts to a less than significant
level.
Aesthetics
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recommend-
ed. The requirements for facility siting, design, operation would reduce potential aesthetic
impacts resulting from prominent views of waste disposal operation and grading activities to a
less than significant level.
Cultural Resources
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for site specific analysis and conforming to any additional mitigation
measures generated by that analysis in addition to stopping work if archaeological resources are
encountered would reduce the potential for archaeological impacts to a less than significant level.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for facility/site monitoring, design and operation, regulatory
compliance along with educational and enforcement programs would reduce the potential for risk
of upset/human health impacts resulting from landfill gas, fires and hazardous waste to a less than
significant level.
Land Use
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for regulatory compliance, education and enforcement programs,
facility location, design, analysis, and operation would reduce the potential land use impacts to
9339S.A 44
surrounding land uses resulting from dust odors, litter, vectors, and traffic to a less than
significant level.
Transportation
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The requirements for project location, operation and scheduling as well as on and off
site improvements provided by specific project applicants would reduce the potential traffic
impacts to a less than significant level.
1.6 HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT
1.6.1 Programs
The Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) focuses on periodic and
permanent collection activities to collect and temporarily store household hazardous waste until
it can be disposed of or recycled elsewhere. This Element includes waste exchange programs,
periodic collection events, permanent collection facilities, and collection at vendor locations. The
proposed annual/periodic HHW collection events as well as oil and latex paint drop-off centers
programs were found to have the potential to result in potentially significant environmental
impacts.
1.6.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the proposed Household Hazardous Waste Element programs are
summarized below:
Air
HHW collection program activities including vehicles transporting HHW and emissions
from consolidating hazardous wastes into storage containers have the potential for significant air
quality impacts.
Transportation
HI-PN collection programs may have the potential for on-site and off-site traffic safety
and volume impacts.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The collection, handling, storage and transportation of HI-1V~ has the potential to result
in significant safety impacts in the event of an accident. Human health impacts could occur from
temporary collection events from HHW emissions. Project related accidents have the potential
9339S.A 45
to occur while Wansporting waste materials to and from the vendor locations and during handling
and storage at the collection site.
Land Use
HHW Collection activities have the potential to result in conflicts with adjacent land
uses resulting from increased traffic and noise in the project area.
1.6.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented as projects are instituted along
with any additional environmental review required by each program. Additionally, the City will
be responsible for the environmental review of any programs within their jurisdiction.
Air
Periodic collection events should be held at location which minimize vehicle miles
traveled to dispose of HHW.
Site operation and layout of periodic collection events should be designated to
minimize vehicle queuing and the need for repeated vehicle starting and stopping to reduce
vehicle emissions.
Transportation
Temporary collection events should be conducted between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4
p.m. to avoid peak hour traffic impacts.
Temporary collection events should be conducted at locations that have existing road
improvements that provide adequate site ingress/egress and space to allow vehicles to safely wait
before unloading wastes.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Advertise and enforce federal and state regulations limiting the volume of hazardous
waste that can be delivered to the project site by facility patrons.
Trained personnel should remove waste from vehicles, and not the homeowners.
Licensed haulers and appropriate containers should be used to transport collected hazardous
waste.
The collection area should be a level paved area to minimize the spread of spilled
fluids. Homeowners should not be allowed near collected HHW areas.
9339S.A 46
Waste identification procedures should be implemented at the facility to ensure that
incompatible wastes are segregated. Collected materials that cannot be identified should be
stored in separate containers until they can be identified.
Fire fighting equipment, spill absorbent and other emergency equipment required by
local fire protection authorities should be provided at the collection area. An emergency response
plan should be reviewed by local fire and police departments.
Temporary collection events should be conducted in areas with adequate setbacks from
adjacent inhabited structures. A minimum buffer area of 1,000 feet should be provided.
Smoking and other potential ignition sources should be prohibited near and at the
collection sites.
Solid waste dumpsters should be provided on site for boxes and containers used to
bring waste to the site and for nonhazardous materials such as dried latex paint cans to reduce
the amount of flammable material stockpiled throughout the site.
Temporary collection sites should be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from residential
areas or other sensitive receptor land uses.
Measures to minimize the effects of an on-site accident should be implemented to
reduce the risk of potential health impacts.
On-site employees should be provided with protective clothing and appropriate
breathing apparatus as required by OSHA and CAL-OSHA requirements.
Waste delivered to the collection site suitable for inclusion in the waste exchange
program should be stored temporarily in an area separated from waste materials that will not be
included in the waste exchange program.
Advertise and enforce federal and state regulations limiting the volume of hazardous
waste that can be delivered to the collection facility.
Waste materials should be packaged, handled, stored and transported consistent with
regulations applicable for the HHW being collected.
Vendors requesting to be collection centers should be subject to permitting
requirements. A permitting program can be used to ensure that vendors provide adequate
handling procedures and storage facilities and are aware of applicable federal, state, and local
regulations. A permitting program would also facilitate the ability to conduct periodic inspections
of the collection facility to ensure regulation compliance.
47
Prior to granting a permit to a vendor collection site, the proposed storage area should
be inspected by appropriate jurisdiction agencies (i.e., building and safety, fire department,
environmental health, etc.) to ensure that the facility meets or can feasibly meet applicable HHW
storage requirements.
The jurisdiction sponsoring the vendor collection program should be responsible for
maintaining contracts with waste haulers and recyclers that are to be used to Wansport and
process the collected waste.
Land Use
Annual/periodic collection events should be conducted between the hours of 9 a.m. and
4 p.m. to reduce traffic trips during peak hours. These hours will also minimize the effects of
project-generated noise.
Annual/periodic collection events should be located in non-residential areas and should
not result in substantial increases in traffic on residential streets. Locations such as large
commercial, industrial, or institutional parking lots that do not have heavy use on weekends may
be suitable locations. If residential or other sensitive uses are in the project vicinity, a minimum
buffer area of at least 1,000 feet should be provided.
1.6.4 Findings
The air quality, transportation, risk of upset/human health, and land use identified by
the EIR for the Household Hazardous Waste Element can be mitigated through the implementa-
tion of siting, operational, design and regulatory requirements, along with enforcement and
education programs. The implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.6.3 or
equivalent performance standards would reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant
level. The specific findings for these issue areas are as follows:
Air Quality
The City finds that the suggested mitigation measures to conduct HHW collection
events in various locations throughout the city and to minimize vehicle emissions by conducting
waste collection operations in an efficient manner are feasible and would substantially reduce
project-related vehicle emissions to levels similar to existing conditions.
Transportation
The City finds that the proposed mitigation measures to schedule collection events to
minimize vehicle trips during peak traffic hours and to conduct events at areas with adequate
road improvements are feasible. These measures would be capable of minimizing the potential
for ~raffic volume and safety impacts resulting from periodic/annual collection events by avoiding
9339S.A 48
peak traffic congestion periods and providing access and road improvements capable of
accommodating project traffic volumes.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
The City finds that mitigation measures to limit the quantity of hazardous waste that
may be accepted from program participants, to provide adequate staff training, site design,
operation and accident response equipment would be feasible. These measures, along with
compliance with applicable federal, state and local regulations would limit waste volumes that
could be collected and/or stored at the project site and would facilitate the control and rapid
response to accidents. Therefore, potential risk of upset impacts would be reduced to a less than
significant level.
The City finds that the implementation of mitigation measures such as the provision
of setbacks from sensitive receptors, compliance with applicable worker safety regulations and
limiting the potential for accidental exposure to collected waste are feasible. These measures
would limit the potential for exposure to hazardous materials by project staff, participants and
surrounding land uses and would reduce potential project-related health impacts to a less than
significant level.
Land Use
The City finds that potential land use conflicts between household hazardous waste
collection events and surrounding land uses can be minimized by implementing mitigation
measures such as limiting the hours of operation of the collection events and conducting the
events at locations that will provide adequate setbacks from residential areas. Implementation
of these measures would be feasible and would reduce the potential for significant land use
conflicts to a less than significant level.
1.7
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative impacts are defined by the State CEQA Guidelines as "two or more
individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or
increase other environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a
single project or a number of separate projects."
1.7.1 Programs
Implementation of the recommendations of the Source Reduction and Recycling
Element and the Household Hazardous Waste Element will create new waste management
programs intended to reduce waste generation and divert waste from landfills. The implementa-
tion of these new programs would be phased over the short and medium-term planning periods.
Many of the proposed projects may be conducted simultaneously along with the continued
operation of several existing landfills. The concurrent operation of existing and proposed waste
9339S.A 49
management programs within the City of Bakersfield, the other incorporated cities, and
unincorporated areas of Kern County, along with other proposed development projects, may have
the potential to result in cumulatively significant environmental impacts. Proposed waste
recycling and waste reduction programs that would have the greatest potential to result in
significant cumulative impacts would be the operation of material recovery and cornposting
facilities, the transfer station and regional landfill program, and the drop-off and collection
programs for solid and hazardous waste.
Environmental issue areas most likely to experience cumulative impacts as a result of
proposed waste management programs included air quality, water supply, and traffic.
1.7.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from the cumulative effects of the proposed programs are summarized below:
Air Quality
Combined emissions from proposed waste management and racycling project operations
would have the potential to exceed emission thresholds that have been established to require the
use of BACT and LAER emission controls. The pollutant most likely to be emitted by each of
the proposed projects would be PM10 associated with construction activities and the dumping of
waste materials.
Water Resources
It is likely that county-wide water use by the proposed SRRE/HHWE projects would
be offset by the reduction in water use for landfilling purposes. However, the proposed
cornposting program has the potential to increase water consumption. The potential for
significant cumulative water use impacts would be dependent upon the anticipated water use of
the proposed projects, locations of the projects, the condition of aquifers that would be used to
supply water and the historical water use at the project site. The potential for cumulative water
use impacts to occur would be greatest in areas where aquifers are in a state of overdraft.
Traffic
The proposed recycling and collection projects will be located throughout Bakersfield.
This dispersal of programs throughout the City will minimize the potential for cumulative traffic
impacts resulting from multiple new waste management facilities utilizing any particular roadway
system. If a proposed project were to generate additional traffic on a roadway or intersection that
currenfiy operated at an unacceptable level of service, the additional waste management-related
traffic would incrementally contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
9339S.A 50
1.7.3 Mitigation Measures
Air Quality
Increases in PMt0 emissions that may result from construction and operation of the
proposed projects should be offset by decreases in PM~0 emissions that would result from the
cessation of waste disposal activities at the local landfills that would be closed as part of the
regional landfill program. This offset, plus the implementation of project-specific PM~0 control
measures that would be required at individual project sites, should be capable of reducing the
potential for significant cumulative air quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Water Resources
Implementation of project specific measures to limit water use at waste management
projects and if necessary, providing offsets to minimize cumulative water supply impacts to
overdrawn aquifers would reduce potential cumulative impacts to a less than significant level.
Traffic
This potential impact could likely be minimized by scheduling project traffic to avoid
impacted roadways during peak hours. If this were not feasible, and the affected jurisdiction had
a traffic impact mitigation fee for cumulative impacts, payment of this fee may be sufficient to
reduce facility-related cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. In some instances,
installation of road improvements such as turn lanes or traffic signals may be necessary to
mitigate a cumulative traffic impact.
1.7.4 Findings
The cumulative air quality, water resources, and traffic impacts identified by the EIR
can be mitigated through the implementation of operational requirements and offsets. The
implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Section 1.7.3 or equivalent performance
standards would reduce the identified impacts to a less than significant level. The specific
findings for these issue areas are as follows:
Air Quality
The City finds that the collection-related increases in mobile emissions would occur
at a faster rate without the waste reduction measures of the proposed project. Based on the
potential for the proposed projects to at least partially offset waste collection vehicle emissions
that would occur without the proposed project, cumulative air quality emissions from mobile
sources are considered to be adverse but not significant. Increases in PM~o emissions that may
result from construction and operation of the proposed projects would be offset by decreases in
PM~0 emissions that would result from the cessation of waste disposal activities at the local
landfills that would be closed as part of the regional landfill program. This offset, plus the
9339S.A 5 1
implementation of project-specific PMl0 control measures that would be required at individual
project sites, would be capable of reducing the potential for significant cumulative air quality
impacts to a less than significant level.
Water Resources
The City finds that potential cumulative water supply impacts resulting from proposed
waste management projects can be feasibly reduced to a less than significant level through the
implementation of the mitigation measures described in section 1.7.3.
Traffic
The City finds that the potential cumulative traffic impacts resulting from proposed
waste management projects can be feasibly reduced to a less than significant level through the
implementation of the mitigation measures described in section 1.7.3.
1.8
GROWTH INDUCEMENT
Growth inducement is an action which could foster economic or population growth,
or the construction of new development, either direcdy or indirectly. Growth-inducement occurs
by removing or eliminating an impediment to population or development growth in an area
(CEQA, Section 15126[g]). The following section provides an assessment of project-related,
growth-inducing effects.
1.8.1 Programs
The City of Bakersfield contains undeveloped areas that presently do not have public
services or adequate infrastructure, such as water or sewer services, to accommodate new
development. If a proposed project were to require ~he installation of new or improved public
services or utilities that could also serve other new development, an obstacle to growth may be
removed and a growth inducing impact may occur. The proposed SRRE and HI-1WE projects
that have the potential to extend infrastructure include the materials recovery facility, transfer
station programs and the composting facility programs. Many of the material recovery facilities,
transfer stations or composting facilities may be located at an existing landfill or in an
agricultural/open space parcel. Open space/agricultural parcels are located in remote areas that
do not currently have the infrastructure and are not planned to provide services for a large
development such as a material recovery facility.
1.8.2 Environmental Impacts
If new growth had the potential to occur in an area not planned for growth by the City
of Bakersfield General Plan, this impact may be significant. The potential for these programs
to result in growth inducing impacts would be dependent upon their location. If new infrastmc-
9339S.A 52
ture is needed to provide services to the proposed projects, it may allow for further development
to occur and thus may be considered growth inducing.
1.8.3 Mitigation Measures
The proposed material recovery facility, transfer stations and composting facility
projects that may require the extension of infrastructure to undeveloped areas such as an
agricultural/open space area or a landfill could have significant growth inducing impacts.
Implementation of one of the following mitigation measures would reduce the potential for
growth inducing impacts to a less than significant level.
The proposed material recovery facility, transfer station projects and cornposting
facility projects should not extend infrastructure to remote locations that are not
presently served by sewer or water services. The proposed projects may utilize or
develop septic systems and water wells for sewage and water needs; or
The proposed material recovery facility, transfer station projects and the proposed
cornposting facility projects may extend infrastructure to the project sites, however,
infrastructure capacity beyond the project's need should not be provided.
1.8.4 Findings
The City finds that it is feasible to implement the mitigation measures as recom-
mended. The policy requirements, as stated above, for control of infrastructure development
potential growth inducing impacts to a less than significant level.
1.9
ALTERNATIVES
A variety of solid and hazardous waste management alternatives will be required to
establish an integrated waste management program capable of implementing waste reduction and
diversion requirements of AB 939. The Program EIR evaluates environmental impacts associated
with the solid waste and household hazardous waste management alternatives recommended by
the Source Reduction and Recycling Elements and the Household Hazardous Waste Elements
prepared for the City of Bakersfield.
1.9.1 Programs
1.9.1.1 "No Project" Alternative
The "No Project" alternative is required by CEQA to be evaluated as an alternative to
the proposed waste management programs. This alternative assumes a status-quo or the
continuation of existing waste management conditions.
53
1.9.1.2 Alternative Project Location at an Urban, Rural, or Landfill Site
This alternative compares environmental impacts associated with locating large waste
management facilities such as material recovery facilities and cornposting facilities at sites that
are located either in rural, urban or at landfill sites. Rural areas would primarily be open space
or agricultural areas, urban areas would be areas designated for commercial or industrial uses,
and landfill sites would be existing landfall disposal sites in Kern County.
1.9.1.3 Regional Alternative Verses Local Project Service Areas
This alternative evaluates environmental impacts associated with the scale or size of
proposed solid and hazardous waste management projects. "Scale of operation" refers to the
physical size of the facility, the size of the wasteshed that it serves and the volume of waste
material handled or processed each day. A materials recovery or composting facility that serves
a local area (such as an individual city) would be smaller in size than a facility that would serve
multiple jurisdictions or a region-wide area.
Implementation of the regional facility alternative would require the use of five
regional facilities that would incorporate material recovery activities and composting facility
operations. The regional sites would be located at the five proposed regional landfills, including
the Ridgecrest, Mojave-Rosamond, Bena, Lost Hills and Taft Landfills. These facilities would
be larger in size than the six proposed material recovery facilities and eight cornposting facilities
identified in the SRRE's.
Implementation of the regional alternative project would combine recovery and
composting facilities into a reduced number of integrated facilities.
1.9.2 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that were identified in the Program EIR as having the
potential to result from alternatives to the proposed programs are summarized below:
1.9.2.1 "No Project" Alternative
If the waste management programs recommended by the SRRE's and HHWE's were
not adopted and implemented, the majority of solid waste generated in the City of Bakersfield
would continue to be disposed by landfilling. If solid waste management strategies similar to
those proposed by the SRRE's and HHWE's are not implemented in the near future, it is likely
that the County and its incorporated cities will not comply with AB 939 requirements. Non-
compliance with the AB 939 waste reduction requirements could result in substantial monetary
penalties (up to $10,000 per day).
The "No Project" alternative would result in the continued reliance on a limited number
of programs for the collection of household hazardous waste. By providing only limited
9339S.A 54
collection opportunities, the potential for illegal disposal and improper storage in households, and
associated disposal impacts, would be increased.
1.9.2.2 Alternative Project Location at an Urban, Rural, or Landfill Site
Geology
Implementation of a waste management facility in an urban or rural area or at a landfill
would result in a similar potential for the project to be affected by geologic impacts. Slope
failure and unstable soil impacts, however, may have the potential to be more significant at a
landfill site due to the presence of cut and fill slopes.
Air Quality
Short-term construction emissions would be similar at each type of location because
similar construction activities would be required. Nuisance impacts (such as dust) may be more
significant in an urban area due to the increased likelihood of sensitive receptors in the project
area.
Long-term emissions from the operation of waste management projects would be
similar if the project was located at a rural, urban or landfill location because emissions that
would be generated by similar project activities would be operation-related and not project site
dependent. Although similar dust and odor emissions would occur at each type of project site,
these emissions would be less likely to result in significant impacts at a landfill or in a rural area,
since these land uses often have odors associated with them and are not generally located near
sensitive receptors. Implementation of waste management facilities at a landfill may have
slightly reduced air quality impacts since materials not recovered could be disposed of
immediately to reduce potential odor sources.
Water Resources
Implementation of waste management projects at a rural, urban or landfill project site
would not affect water use rates or potential water quality impacts associated with a proposed
project. The potential for water resource impacts would be dependent upon the characteristics
of groundwater and surface water resoumes in the project vicinity. Areas with recognized water
supply shortages or areas that are significant groundwater recharge areas would be more likely
to result in significant water resource impacts than any general type of project site.
Noise
Noise generated by the waste management projects would be similar regardless of the
project location. If a waste management project was located in an urban area, however, noise
impacts would be more likely to impact sensitive receptors than if it was located in a rural area
or at a landfill.
9339S.A 55
Biology
Since a rural site would not have been previously developed, or experienced only
minimal ground disturbance, the potential for biologic impacts may be higher than at an urban
site or at a landfill site.
Aesthetics
If a waste management project was located in an urban area or at a landfill, potential
aesthetic impacts from the development of new structures may be less significant than if the
project was located in a rural area. Stxucmres typically used for waste management projects may
be more compatible with landfill and industrial area characteristics than in a rural area that does
not have extensive development. Litter impacts that may result from waste management projects
would have the potential to be significant at a remote landfill and rural locations, as well as in
an urban setting.
Cultural Resources
Since a rural site would not have been previously developed, or experienced only
minimal ground disturbance, the potential for archaeological resource impacts may be higher than
at an urban site or at a landfill.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Implementation of a large waste management facility in a rural area or at a landfill
would reduce the number of people near the facility that could potentially be affected by facility-
related impacts such as noise, pests and vectors, dust, fires, odors and other potential impacts.
A project location in an urban area with higher population densities would increase the potential
for health and safety impacts.
Transportation
Baseline traffic conditions at a rural site or at a landfill would likely have lower traffic
volumes than at an urban site. Therefore, the addition of traffic to the project area roadways is
less likely to result in a significant traffic impact. A substantial increase in traffic volumes at
a rural location, however, would likely result in an increased percentage of vehicles utilizing the
roadway than would occur at an urban site. The relatively larger increase in total vehicles on
rural roads could result in impacts such as traffic safety and noise that would not occur at an
urban site.
Public Services/Utilities
Rural and landfill project sites typically possess characteristics that may result in
significant development constraints, as it is likely that these sites will not have infrastructure
56
capabilities to serve the project, such as sewer and water service. Extension of these services to
a rural or landfill site could result in significant growth inducing impacts. Response times by
emergency services would be longer at a rural site; therefore, impacts resulting from upset
conditions would have the potential to be greater than at an urban site.
Land Use
Implementation of a waste management project at a landfill or in a rural area would
have a reduced potential to result in impacts to surrounding sensitive receptors than at an urban
area, due to their remote location. Land use conflicts, however, could also occur at a rural
location if the site was near or would utilize access routes adjacent to residential uses or other
sensitive receptors.
1.9.2.3 Regional Alternative Verses Local Project Service Areas
Geology
The integrated waste management facilities would be subject to similar geologic
processes and impacts as the proposed local projects. This alternative would be subject to
seismic and soil-related hazards. The significance of geologic impacts are dependent upon
project site characteristics rather than project activities.
Air Quality
Short-term air quality emissions would be reduced by the regional alternative since
fewer project sites would be required to be disturbed. Long-term operational air quality impacts
resulting from the regional projects would likely be similar to the proposed project operations at
multiple sites because a similar total volume of waste material would be recovered and similar
operations would be conducted. However, the regional project alternative may result in an
incremental increase in air quality impacts resulting from the transport of additional solid waste
from transfer stations that would be utilized to transport additional waste to the regional facilities.
Water Resources
Impacts regarding total water use for waste management could vary considerably under
the proposed project versus the regional alternative. Duplication of project activities at the
additional sites that would be implemented by the proposed project could result in increased
water use than would be associated with the regional alternative. However, the use of local
facilities may enhance the ability to tailor waste management operations to specific waste
streams, which may result in similar total water demand than at a regional facility. The
significance of possible water supply impacts would be largely dictated by the ability of local
jurisdictions to supply water to either a local or regional facility. Decreasing the number of solid
waste management facilities that are constructed and operated would also result in fewer potential
57
water resource contamination sites throughout the County. Fewer waste management sites would
also reduce future water quality monitoring requirements.
Biology
If the local service area project sites were located in areas with significant biologic
habitat, the additional project sites may result in more impacts than would occur from the
regional facilities. Since regional projects would be located at landfill sites that may be
previously disturbed, the potential for biological impacts may be further reduced by the regional
project alternative. Conversely, if a smaller land area were required by the localized facilities
because the local programs would allow each facility to be specifically tailored to the needs of
the individual city or jurisdiction, potential environmental impacts could be reduced.
Noise
Noise generated on-site would be expected to be greater from the regional projects than
the smaller local projects because of increased waste volumes and waste management activities
that would be conducted at an integrated project site. However, since solid waste activities
would be concentrated at five regional landfill sites, the potential for noise impacts to sensitive
receptors may be reduced.
Aesthetics
With the proposed project, aesthetic impacts such as light and glare, and concerns
regarding compatibility with surrounding uses would have the potential to occur at multiple sites.
The regional projects would concentrate waste management activities in five areas rather than
additional sites dispersed throughout the County. Aesthetic impacts would be additionally
reduced since the waste management projects would be located at landfill sites and would not
likely impact sensitive receptors, therefore this alternative may reduce potential aesthetic impacts.
Cultural Resources
Potential impacts to cultural resources may be reduced at the regional landfill sites
since the projects would disturb fewer project sites.
Risk of Upset/Human Health
Potential impacts regarding risk of upset and human health would be incrementally
increased at a regional facility than the proposed project because of increased volumes and
concentrations of waste materials. By regionalizing the waste management projects there would
be several activities conducted at the project sites at one time such as cornposting, material
recovery and landfilling. Multiple activities may increase potential impacts and may increase the
magnitude of impacts, as well as the amount of people that may be impacted, if upset conditions
occurred. Beneficial aspects of regionalizing waste management activities would be that fewer
9339s.^ 58
monitoring and inspection programs would be required to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations that reduce the risk of waste-related accidents and waste management project would
be located at remote project sites.
Transportation
The proposed local project approach would reduce the vehicle miles traveled associated
with hauling waste material to a regional facility, resulting in a reduced likelihood of adding
additional vehicle trips to roadways or intersections that operate at unacceptable levels of service.
If the regional project alterative was implemented, materials rainsported from the transfer stations
to regional project sites would be increased and more vehicle trips would be required. Additional
truck trips consolidated in the five proposed area landfills could significantly impact roadways.
Public Services/Utilities
The proposed local waste management programs and regional alternative program
would have similar requirements for public services and utilities, however theses services would
be more concentrated at the regional sites. Public services and utility impacts may be more
significant at the regional sites since the regional sites would be located at landfills and
infrastructure for utilities may be more difficult to provide.
Land Use
With the proposed project, land use conflicts and concerns regarding compatibility with
surrounding uses would have the potential to occur at numerous sites. This alternative would
reduce this impact by concentrating waste management activities at the five regional landfill sites.
Additional land use impacts may be reduced by the regional alternative locating the projects at
remote landfill sites would minimize the potential for impacts to sensitive receptors.
Sighting of waste management facilities is often controversial. It could be more
difficult to site, permit, and construct multiple facilities than a few large facilities.
1.9.3 Findings
1.9.3.1 "No Project" Alternative
The City finds that the "No Project" alternative would avoid significant impacts
associated with implementing the proposed waste management programs. This alternative,
however, would result in a continued reliance on landfilling for solid waste disposal and non-
compliance with the legislative requirements of AB 939. Therefore, the "No Project" alternative
is not a feasible alternative to the proposed project.
9339S.A 59
1.9.3.2 Alternative Project Location at an Urban, Rural, or Landfill Site
The City finds that there are substantial advantages and disadvantages associated with
the urban, rural, and landffil project sites. While urban sites will have an increased likelihood
of being able to provide necessary services and would be less constrained by biologic or
archaeologic resources, rural and landfill sites are less likely to result in conflicts with
surrounding land uses. A final determination regarding which type of site is environmentally
superior would be dependant upon the type of project proposed and specific site characteristics.
1.9.3.3 Regional Alternative Verses Local Project Service Areas
The City finds that this alternative would concentrate and regionalize waste
management operations at five large facilities rather than have multiple jurisdiction design waste
management projects to meet their specific needs. This alternative may reduce redundant
operations of smaller operations, such as multiple operations and storage areas that may require
more land area than the storage area for a larger centralized facility. The severity of site specific
impacts associated with the large regional facilities versus smaller local facilities could be greater
in scale, however, it is likely that similar mitigation measures to reduce impacts of a large facility
would also be required at the smaller facilities. Without specific project design or locations
available for review, it cannot be determined at this time whether the local or regional facilities
alternative would be environmentally superior.
1.10 UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The Program EIR evaluated a variety of solid and hazardous waste reduction, recycling
and management projects that may be implemented by the City of Bakersfield. Site-specific
development proposals for the programs recommended by the SRRE/HHWE are not yet available
for review. Due to the absence of project location and design information, the environmental
impacts that were identified in the EIR are those impacts that would be likely to occur from the
implementation of the proposed projects. The mitigation measures that have been included in
the EIR are measures that should be capable of reducing the identified "typical" impacts that may
result from the implementation of the recommended projects. Based on the limited project-
specific information that is available at this time, no unavoidable environmental impacts have
been identified. Thus, no "statement of overriding considerations" are required at this time.
9339S.A 60
MEMORANDUM
February 11, 1993
TO: FILE
FROM: GINGER J. ROE, CLERK TYPIST ~
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 13-93, NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
On 2/9/93, at approximately 3:30 p.m. I spoke with Mr. Gregg
Strakaluse at the Kern County Waste Management Department. I was
concerned that the Notice of Determination he had sent to us was
different from the "Sample" taken from Resolution No. 13-93.
Under "Project Title" he confirmed that the new information
stating: "Programmed Environmental Impact Report for the Source
Reduction and Recycling Elements/Household Hazardous Elements"
was correct.
Under No. 1, the statement "This project will not have a
significant effect on the environment" is correct.
On the new form, I was concerned that No. 5 was missing. He
informed me that this statement should be included on the new
form. I typed this statement onto the form.
I have had Mike Sides, Sanitation Department, review the form and
he has confirmed its accuracy.
I will place the "Sample" Notice of Determination behind this
memorandum to allow a comparison to be made if the form comes
into question.
:gjr
p:\memos\RES13.93
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
TO: City Clerk
City of
*Address'
FROM: City of "X"
"Address"
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources
Code.
Project Title: The Kern County and Incorporated Cities Program Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse)
91072054
Contact Person:
Gregg Strakaluse
Telephone Number:
(805) 861-2159
Project Location: Kern County and Incorporated Cities
Project Description: The Program Environmental Impact Report evaluates environmental impacts associated with
the Source Reduction and Recycling Elements and Household Hazardous Waste Elements for Kern County and
its eleven incorporated cities.
This is to advise that, on October 20, 1992, the Kern County Board of Supervisors has approved the above-described
project and has made the following determinations regarding the above-described project:
1. The project X wil~have a significant effect on the environment.
will not
~ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA.
The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at the Kern County Waste
Management Department, 2700 "M" Street, Suite 500, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
3. Mitigation measures
X were made a condition of the approval of the project.
were not
4. A Statement of Overriding Consideration __ was adopted for this project.
X was not
5. The City of "X" concurs with the certification of the Environmental Impact Report by the Board of Supervisors on
Date Project Approved
Resolution No.
~, ~-~
Signature
Date Received for Filing
Title
¢:\finod Fi{e/Di.k (NODt .D46)
Date: