California is about to make it easier to dump toxic waste in your neighborhood. Here's what to do about it
In Richmond, where I live, we know what happens when hazardous waste is treated as an afterthought.
Our shoreline is tainted with the legacy of more than a century of heavy industry — shuttered chemical plants, old oil tanks and hazardous waste sites that still bleed toxins into the soil and San Francisco Bay.
California's Department of Toxic Substances Control is updating the state's Hazardous Waste Management Plan, a document that's supposed to chart a safer, smarter future for dealing with our most dangerous industrial byproducts. But buried deep in the current version of the update is a proposal to allow more contaminated soil and toxic materials to be dumped in regular municipal landfills — sites never designed to safely contain hazardous waste.
In the department's own words, it would like to 'identify and evaluate protective alternative management standards for soil identified as hazardous … to be disposed of in authorized non-hazardous waste landfills.'
The bureaucratic language masks the dangerous implications: This policy shift could allow contaminated soil to land in everyday landfills near homes, schools and playgrounds, exposing Bay Area residents to heightened health and environmental risks.
Richmond residents already breathe some of the dirtiest air in the state. Many of our children struggle with asthma, and our elders are burdened with pollution-related heart and respiratory disease and cancer. And for decades, Richmond activists have fought for stronger environmental protections — not just for ourselves, but for frontline communities across California.
So, when the state quietly proposes to weaken rules that govern how and where toxic waste is dumped, we recognize it's not just a bureaucratic policy change — it's a threat. A threat to the health of our neighborhoods. A threat to the progress we've made. And a signal that California may be choosing pollution expansion over pollution reduction.
Under this plan, the list of landfills eligible to receive toxic soil will grow, and many of them are in the Bay Area. Sites in San Jose, Vacaville, Half Moon Bay, Pittsburg and Petaluma. These are not theoretical locations. These are real communities with schools and homes and playgrounds, now being eyed as future dumping grounds for California's toxic leftovers.
The Department of Toxic Substances Control says the plan will reduce long-distance trucking and lower emissions. But that's a false tradeoff. Instead of dealing with toxic waste at the source, this plan just spreads it farther and faster. This is not a pollution control strategy — it's a pollution expansion strategy. It's cheaper. It's easier. And it puts the risks right back on communities ill-equipped to deal with them.
What's especially unacceptable is that this policy is moving forward with barely a whisper of public engagement. So far, there's only been one public hearing with the department's oversight body, the state Board of Environmental Safety — in Fresno, during the day, when most community members need to be at work. Despite these constraints, more than 40 speakers voiced opposition, including environmental justice advocates, public health experts, and impacted residents. Not a single person or industry group spoke in favor.
And yet, the plan is now headed to the Bay Area unchanged.
There will be a second public hearing on Thursday at the department's offices in Berkeley. It's the only opportunity for Bay Area residents to speak out. After a hearing in Los Angeles on May 15, the state Board of Environmental Safety will cast its final vote on July 15-16 at a meeting in Sacramento.
The five-member Board of Environmental Safety, made up of appointees from the Legislature and the governor, was created in 2021 legislation to provide greater oversight and accountability to the Department of Toxic Substances Control, after years of criticism that the agency was nonresponsive to public input and lacked transparency in decision-making. The same law gave the board oversight authority over what gets included in the department's Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
The hearings and July vote will be the most significant tests yet of the new board's ability to restore public confidence in the agency.
After that, this policy becomes part of California's roadmap for hazardous waste — one that could remain in place for years.
We still have time to change course.
So far, members of the oversight board have raised important questions: Why weren't environmental justice groups consulted? Why hasn't the department conducted site-specific environmental and health impact studies? Why not invest in contaminant removal and source reduction, instead of lowering the bar for disposal?
Those are the right questions. But now the board needs to hear from the public — especially from those of us who would bear the brunt of these changes.
Richmond isn't alone in this fight. Communities all over the Bay Area are connected by this proposal. If the Department of Toxic Substances Control moves forward, it won't be just one city that feels the consequences, it will be dozens. And the people who feel it most will be the same ones who've been left out of the conversation for too long.
Help us tell the board: We're not going to accept a plan that rolls back protections and treats our communities as dumping grounds.
California should be leading the nation in environmental stewardship. This new hazardous waste plan risks sending us in the wrong direction. We deserve a plan that prioritizes health, safety and justice — not one that makes it easier to spread pollution to already overburdened communities.
Janet Johnson is coordinator of the Richmond Shoreline Alliance, a project of San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility, working to protect the Bay Area's shoreline and Richmond residents from environmental harm.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Yahoo
California board voted to nix a controversial hazardous waste proposal
A state environmental oversight board voted unanimously to rescind a controversial proposal that would have permitted California municipal landfills to accept contaminated soil that is currently required to be dumped at sites specifically designated and approved for hazardous waste. Earlier this year, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released a draft of its first-ever Hazardous Waste Management Plan, a document intended to guide the state's strategy on dangerous waste. The draft plan included a recommendation to weaken California's disposal rules for contaminated soil — typically the largest segment of hazardous waste produced each year. The potential change would have allowed contaminated soil from heavily polluted sites to be dumped at landfills that were not designed to handle hazardous waste. Environmental advocates and community members expressed concerns that the rollback could result in toxic dust blowing into communities near local landfills or dangerous chemicals leaching into groundwater. State officials countered by saying that contaminated soil would only go to landfills equipped with liners that would prevent toxic substances from seeping into local aquifers. At a public meeting on the plan held on Thursday evening, the Board of Environmental Safety — a five-member panel established to provide oversight of DTSC — unanimously voted to remove that recommendation from the state's draft plan. That followed months of intense scrutiny from residents and environmental groups directed toward the plan. DTSC officials present at the meeting also signaled that they would support the board's decision to nix the revision. 'I heard you talk about the pollution burdens you already face,' DTSC deputy director Mandi Bane said to the crowd of a few dozen who had gathered at the department's offices in Cypress. 'The worry that DTSC is taking steps that will endanger your community by making that pollution burden worse, and [the] outrage that these steps will be taken without consultation and discussion. As a public health professional, the stress, the fear, the anger that I heard from folks was very concerning ... and I do want to apologize that this plan had that impact." Heavily polluting industries have tainted soil across California. More than 560,000 tons of hazardous soil are produced each year in California as environmental regulators endeavor to prevent residents from coming in contact with chemical-laced soil and developers build on land in industrial corridors. However, the vast majority of this soil is not considered hazardous outside of California. The state has hazardous waste regulations that are more stringent than the federal government and most states in the country. There are only two waste facilities in California that meet the state's rigorous guidelines for hazardous materials, both in the San Joaquin Valley. Any hazardous dirt in California must be trucked there, or exported to landfills in neighboring states that rely on the more lenient federal standards. State officials argued the current rules make it difficult and expensive to dispose of contaminated soil, noting that the average distance such waste is trucked right now is about 440 miles, according to the draft plan. Ahead of the board vote, environmental advocates rallied outside of the DTSC offices in Cypress, calling on state officials to uphold California's hazardous waste standards for contaminated soil. Angela Johnson Meszaros, an attorney with Earthjustice, said the proposal would effectively forgo California's regulatory authority and rely on the federal environmental rules — at a time when the Trump administration is repealing environmental policy. "This plan is a travesty, and I'm calling on DTSC to be better than this," Johnson Meszaros said at Thursday's meeting. "If we don't draw the line with this massive deregulatory effort, there is no line. We will be swept up in the insanity we see at the national level.' The discussion of hazardous waste disposal has been thrust into the public spotlight recently as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers continues to remove toxic ash and contaminated soil from properties destroyed in the Eaton and Palisades wildfires. Because disaster debris is traditionally considered not hazardous, federal contractors have been hauling this material to several nonhazardous local landfills without testing it. In response to the federal cleanup plans, residents in unincorporated Agoura and the Granada Hills neighborhood in Los Angeles staged protests near local landfills. Melissa Bumstead, an environmental advocate and San Fernando Valley resident, urged the Board of Environmental Safety to consider factoring disaster debris into the hazardous waste plan. With climate change fueling increasingly destructive wildfires, this will continue to be an issue for years to come, she said. "This is an opportunity, not just with hazardous waste that is manufactured," Bumstead said, "but also hazardous waste that is created by wildfires on how to create a plan that is going to protect Californians in the future." This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
16-05-2025
- Los Angeles Times
California board voted to nix a controversial hazardous waste proposal
A state environmental oversight board voted unanimously to rescind a controversial proposal that would have permitted California municipal landfills to accept contaminated soil that is currently required to be dumped at sites specifically designated and approved for hazardous waste. Earlier this year, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released a draft of its first-ever Hazardous Waste Management Plan, a document intended to guide the state's strategy on dangerous waste. The draft plan included a recommendation to weaken California's disposal rules for contaminated soil — typically the largest segment of hazardous waste produced each year. The potential change would have allowed contaminated soil from heavily polluted sites to be dumped at landfills that were not designed to handle hazardous waste. Environmental advocates and community members expressed concerns that the rollback could result in toxic dust blowing into communities near local landfills or dangerous chemicals leaching into groundwater. State officials countered by saying that contaminated soil would only go to landfills equipped with liners that would prevent toxic substances from seeping into local aquifers. At a public meeting on the plan held on Thursday evening, the Board of Environmental Safety — a five-member panel established to provide oversight of DTSC — unanimously voted to remove that recommendation from the state's draft plan. That followed months of intense scrutiny from residents and environmental groups directed toward the plan. DTSC officials present at the meeting also signaled that they would support the board's decision to nix the revision. 'I heard you talk about the pollution burdens you already face,' DTSC deputy director Mandi Bane said to the crowd of a few dozen who had gathered at the department's offices in Cypress. 'The worry that DTSC is taking steps that will endanger your community by making that pollution burden worse, and [the] outrage that these steps will be taken without consultation and discussion. As a public health professional, the stress, the fear, the anger that I heard from folks was very concerning ... and I do want to apologize that this plan had that impact.' Heavily polluting industries have tainted soil across California. More than 560,000 tons of hazardous soil are produced each year in California as environmental regulators endeavor to prevent residents from coming in contact with chemical-laced soil and developers build on land in industrial corridors. However, the vast majority of this soil is not considered hazardous outside of California. The state has hazardous waste regulations that are more stringent than the federal government and most states in the country. There are only two waste facilities in California that meet the state's rigorous guidelines for hazardous materials, both in the San Joaquin Valley. Any hazardous dirt in California must be trucked there, or exported to landfills in neighboring states that rely on the more lenient federal standards. State officials argued the current rules make it difficult and expensive to dispose of contaminated soil, noting that the average distance such waste is trucked right now is about 440 miles, according to the draft plan. Ahead of the board vote, environmental advocates rallied outside of the DTSC offices in Cypress, calling on state officials to uphold California's hazardous waste standards for contaminated soil. Angela Johnson Meszaros, an attorney with Earthjustice, said the proposal would effectively forgo California's regulatory authority and rely on the federal environmental rules — at a time when the Trump administration is repealing environmental policy. 'This plan is a travesty, and I'm calling on DTSC to be better than this,' Johnson Meszaros said at Thursday's meeting. 'If we don't draw the line with this massive deregulatory effort, there is no line. We will be swept up in the insanity we see at the national level.' The discussion of hazardous waste disposal has been thrust into the public spotlight recently as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers continues to remove toxic ash and contaminated soil from properties destroyed in the Eaton and Palisades wildfires. Because disaster debris is traditionally considered not hazardous, federal contractors have been hauling this material to several nonhazardous local landfills without testing it. In response to the federal cleanup plans, residents in unincorporated Agoura and the Granada Hills neighborhood in Los Angeles staged protests near local landfills. Melissa Bumstead, an environmental advocate and San Fernando Valley resident, urged the Board of Environmental Safety to consider factoring disaster debris into the hazardous waste plan. With climate change fueling increasingly destructive wildfires, this will continue to be an issue for years to come, she said. 'This is an opportunity, not just with hazardous waste that is manufactured,' Bumstead said, 'but also hazardous waste that is created by wildfires on how to create a plan that is going to protect Californians in the future.'
Associated Press
16-05-2025
- Associated Press
Board stops California toxic waste regulators from weakening a hazardous waste rule
CYPRESS, Calif. (AP) — California shouldn't weaken hazardous waste rules to allow local landfills to accept toxic dirt that currently goes to two specialized disposal sites in the Central Valley and hazardous facilities in other states, the state Board of Environmental Safety voted Thursday. The vote went against a proposal by the Department of Toxic Substances Control that had prompted fierce opposition from environmental groups. 'I think they have been really listening to the community,' said Melissa Bumstead with the advocacy group Parents Against the Santa Susana Field Lab. California's hazardous waste laws are stricter than the federal government's, and the state has long transported much of the waste it considers hazardous to other states with more lenient rules. The Department of Toxic Substances Control said disposing more waste in state would likely reduce costs and truck emissions. But environmental advocates worried the plan could have exposed already vulnerable communities to contaminated waste and set the precedent for more rules to be weakened. 'I don't think that municipal waste landfills were ever designed to accept this kind of waste, and to deregulate it ... puts those landfill communities' at risk, said Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics. California only has two hazardous waste landfills — Buttonwillow and Kettleman Hills in the San Joaquin Valley — which are expected to reach capacity by 2039, according to a report by the department. An estimated 47% of California's hazardous waste is trucked across state borders. Contaminated soil, waste oil and mixed oil are the state's three largest annual sources of hazardous waste. On average, more than 567,000 tons (514,373 metric tons) of toxic soil are produced every year. Los Angeles wildfires raised awareness of the issue The hearing comes months after wildfires in Los Angeles incinerated cars, homes and everything in them, turning ordinary objects into hundreds of tons of hazardous waste requiring specialized cleanup. It was the largest wildfire hazardous materials cleanup in the EPA's history. The infernos have also raised concerns about toxic ash and soil. Just this week, the Pasadena Unified School District published soil testing results showing high levels of arsenic or brain-damaging lead in nearly half its schools. After the fires, hazardous waste was sent to temporary sites to be separated and packaged before most of it was trucked to Utah, Arizona, Nebraska and Arkansas. Two facilities were in California — in Wilmington, near the port of Long Beach, and Buttonwillow. The type and amount of waste deposited in them varies by site, but it includes oil, radioactive materials, paint residue, asbestos, controlled substances and fluorescent lamps. 'I think that the fires have really brought to the fore some long-standing issues,' said Angela Johnson Meszaros with the environmental law group Earthjustice. 'And one of them is, how are we going to deal with cleanup, right? Because fires are not the only thing that cause soil to be hazardous.' A state law passed in 2021 set out to reform the Department of Toxic Substances Control. In March, the department released a draft plan of sweeping proposals that would guide state and local hazardous management. The board is expected to make a final decision in the summer, and it's not clear if the department could go against the board's wishes not to weaken the hazardous waste disposal rule. Board member Alexis Strauss Hacker recalled how concerned people were about the proposal during their March meeting in Fresno. The fear, she said, was 'so palpable.' Although California has decreased its hazardous waste by more than 40% since 2000, lithium-ion batteries and other types of waste are expected to increase, the report says, and the state currently lacks the capacity to manage them. Lithium-ion batteries are found in common items such as electronic vehicles, cellphones and laptops. Decades of industrial environmental pollution can accumulate, too. The issue is personal for one activist Bumstead has lived near the heavily polluted Santa Susana Field Laboratory in Southern California, once a site for rocket testing and nuclear reactor development. Her 15-year-old daughter is a two-time cancer survivor, and Bumstead was born with three spleens. She believes her family's health issues are linked to pollution from the nearby site. So when she heard that California environmental regulators wanted to weaken hazardous waste disposal rules in a bid to dump toxic soil into local landfills, she was very concerned. The Los Angeles fires have made more people realize that toxic materials could end up in their backyard, Bumstead said. 'The more we see climate change, the more we see wildfires, the more this is going to become a front line issue,' she told the board. 'This is an opportunity not just for hazardous waste that is manufactured, but also hazardous waste that is created by wildfires on how to create a plan that is going to protect Californians in the future.' ——— The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP's environmental coverage, visit
