Board stops California toxic waste regulators from weakening a hazardous waste rule
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.'
———
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
15 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump admin plans to screen social media accounts for 'anti-American' views before allowing applicants into US
The Trump administration's immigration services is going to begin scanning potential visa and green card applicants' social media accounts for 'anti-Americanism.' President Donald Trump has made toughening up U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services a key part of his agenda on immigration. USCIS said officers will now consider whether an applicant for benefits, such as a visa or green card, 'endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused' anti-American, terrorist or antisemitic views. 'America´s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies,' Matthew Tragesser, USCIS spokesman, said in a statement. 'Immigration benefits-including to live and work in the United States-remain a privilege, not a right.' It isn't specified what constitutes anti-Americanism and it isn't clear how and when the directive would be applied. 'The message is that the U.S. and immigration agencies are going to be less tolerant of anti-Americanism or antisemitism when making immigration decisions,' Elizabeth Jacobs, director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for immigration restrictions, said on Tuesday. Jacobs said the government is being more explicit in the kind of behaviors and practices officers should consider, but emphasized that discretion is still in place. 'The agency cannot tell officers that they have to deny - just to consider it as a negative discretion,' she said. Critics worry the policy update will allow for more subjective views of what is considered anti-American and allow an officer's personal bias to cloud his or her judgment. 'For me, the really big story is they are opening the door for stereotypes and prejudice and implicit bias to take the wheel in these decisions. That´s really worrisome,' said Jane Lilly Lopez, associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University. The policy changes follow others recently implemented since the start of the Trump administration including social media vetting and the most recent addition of assessing applicants seeking naturalization for `good moral character'. That will not only consider 'not simply the absence of misconduct' but also factor the applicant´s positive attributes and contributions. 'It means you are going to just do a whole lot more work to provide evidence that you meet our standards,' Lopez said. Experts disagree on the constitutionality of the policy involving people who are not U.S. citizens and their freedom of speech. Jacobs, of the Center for Immigration Studies, said First Amendment rights do not extend to people outside the U.S. or who are not U.S. citizens. Ruby Robinson, senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, believes the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution protects all people in the United States, regardless of their immigration status, against government encroachment. 'A lot of this administration´s activities infringe on constitutional rights and do need to be resolved, ultimately, in courts,' Robinson added. Attorneys are advising clients to adjust their expectations. 'People need to understand that we have a different system today and a lot more things that apply to U.S. citizens are not going to apply to somebody who´s trying to enter the United States,' said Jaime Diez, an immigration attorney based in Brownsville, Texas. Jonathan Grode, managing partner of Green and Spiegel immigration law firm, said the policy update was not unexpected considering how the Trump administration approaches immigration. 'This is what was elected. They´re allowed to interpret the rules the way they want,' Grode said. 'The policy always to them is to shrink the strike zone. The law is still the same.' USCIS has made several moves as Trump has returned to office to ally with the president's agenda. They have implemented new restrictions in compliance with Trump's executive orders to suspend processing of requests for legal permanent residency for immigrants granted refugee or asylum status, CBS News reports. The Department of Homeland Security said the green card processing pause was necessary to comply with two executive actions issued by the president. 'USCIS is placing a temporary pause on finalizing certain Adjustment of Status applications pending the completion of additional screening and vetting to identify potential fraud, public safety, or national security concerns, in alignment with Mr. Trump's executive actions,' the statement said. According to a presidential proclamation cited by officials, Donald Trump has instructed federal agencies to 'vet and screen to the maximum degree possible all aliens who intend to be admitted, enter, or are already inside the United States.' The administration's tightening of restrictions on immigration policies and procedures are the latest attempts to tackle concerns of national security and fraud. The move comes after Trump questioned the immigration vetting procedures under the Biden administration. USCIS also announced earlier this month that they have updated immigration policy to restrict visa eligibility for transgender women seeking to compete in women's sports. Under the policy update, USCIS will consider 'the fact that a male athlete has been competing against women' as a negative factor when evaluating visa petitions in categories such as O-1A for extraordinary ability, EB-1 and EB-2 green cards for highly skilled workers, and national interest waivers. 'USCIS is closing the loophole for foreign male athletes whose only chance at winning elite sports is to change their gender identity and leverage their biological advantages against women,' said USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser. 'It's a matter of safety, fairness, respect, and truth that only female athletes receive a visa to come to the U.S. to participate in women's sports.' set to host the Olympics in Los Angeles in 2028.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
9/11 victims' fund architect slams changes to New Hampshire abuse settlement program
An attorney who helped design and implement the 9/11 victims' compensation fund says New Hampshire lawmakers have eroded the fairness of a settlement program for those who were abused at the state's youth detention center. Deborah Greenspan, who served as deputy special master of the fund created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, recently submitted an affidavit in a class-action lawsuit seeking to block changes to New Hampshire's out-of-court settlement fund for abuse victims. She's among those expected to testify Wednesday at a hearing on the state's request to dismiss the case and other matters. More than 1,300 people have sued the state since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused as children while in state custody, mostly at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Most of them put their lawsuits on hold after lawmakers created a settlement fund in 2022 that was pitched as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in June. The amended law gives the governor authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator and gives the attorney general — also a political appointee — veto power over settlement awards. That stands in stark contrast to other victim compensation funds, said Greenspan, who currently serves as a court-appointed special master for lawsuits related to lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan. She said it 'strains credulity' to believe that anyone would file a claim knowing that 'the persons ultimately deciding the claim were those responsible for the claimant's injuries.' 'Such a construct would go beyond the appearance of impropriety and create a clear conflict of interest, undermining the fairness and legitimacy of the settlement process," she wrote. Ayotte and Attorney General John Formella responded by asking a judge to bar Greenspan's testimony, saying she offered 'policy preferences masquerading as expert opinions' without explaining the principles beyond her conclusions. 'Her affidavit is instead a series of non sequiturs that move from her experience to her conclusions without any of the necessary connective tissue,' they wrote. The defendants argue that the law still requires the administrator to be 'an independent, neutral attorney' and point out that the same appointment process is used for the state's judges. They said giving the attorney general the authority to accept or reject settlements is necessary to give the public a voice and ensure that the responsibility for spending millions of dollars in public funds rests with the executive branch. As of June 30, nearly 2,000 people had filed claims with the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. A total of 386 had been settled, with an average award of $545,000. One of the claimants says he was awarded $1.5 million award in late July, but the state hasn't finalized it yet, leaving him worried that Formella will veto it. 'I feel like the state has tricked us,' he said in an interview this week. 'We've had the rug pulled right out from underneath us.' The Associated Press does not name those who say they were sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly. The claimant, now 39, said the two years he spent at the facility as a teenager were the hardest times of his life. 'I lost my childhood. I lost things that I can't get back,' he said. 'I was broken.' Though the settlement process was overwhelming and scary at times, the assistant administrator who heard his case was kind and understanding, he said. That meeting alone was enough to lift a huge burden, he said. 'I was treated with a lot of love,' he said. 'I felt really appreciated as a victim and like I was speaking to somebody who would listen and believe my story.' Separate from the fund, the state has settled two lawsuits by agreeing to pay victims $10 million and $4.5 million. Only one lawsuit has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. The state has also brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. The 39-year-old claimant who fears his award offer will be retracted said he doesn't know if he could face testifying at a public trial. 'It's basically allowing the same people who hurt us to hurt us all over again,' he said.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
US budget deficit forecast $1 trillion higher over next decade, watchdog says
WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - U.S. federal budget deficits will be nearly $1 trillion higher over the next decade than projected in January by the Congressional Budget Office as a result of tax and spending legislation and tariffs, a budget watchdog said on Wednesday. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget's latest forecasts show a cumulative deficit of $22.7 trillion from fiscal 2026 to 2035, compared to the CBO's January forecast of $21.8 trillion, which was based on laws and policies that were in place before U.S. President Donald Trump took office in January. The CBO, Congress' non-partisan budget referee agency, said on Monday, opens new tab that it will not issue its customary mid-year budget update this year and will issue its next 10-year budget and economic outlook in early 2026, offering no explanation for the move. The CRFB, which advocates for deficit reduction, projected a $1.7 trillion deficit in fiscal 2025 or 5.6% of GDP, down slightly from $1.83 trillion in 2024 and the CBO's 2025 projection of $1.87 trillion in January. But it said deficits steadily rise over the decade, reaching $2.6 trillion or 5.9% of GDP by 2035. The new CRFB estimates include the budget effects of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending bill, as well as Trump's tariffs that are currently in place. But like CBO, they do not include the dynamic economic effects on growth from these changes, a forecasting rule that has drawn criticism from the Trump administration. The group projects the tax cut and spending bill to increase deficits, including interest, by $4.6 trillion through 2035, adding another year to the CBO's $4.1 trillion cost estimate through 2034. But CRFB estimates that this will be offset by $3.4 trillion worth of extra import duty revenue over the next decade due to Trump's new tariffs that are currently in place. New rules restricting eligibility for health insurance subsidies will reduce deficits by another $100 billion through 2035, and Congress' rescission of prior funding to foreign aid, public broadcasting and other programs would save another $100 billion if sustained over a decade, CRFB said. Net interest payments on the national debt will total $14 trillion over the decade, CRFB projected, rising from nearly $1 trillion or 3.2% of GDP in 2025 to $1.8 trillion or 4.1% of GDP in 2035. The forecasts are based on legislative and tariff changes since January but keep CBO's economic forecasts unchanged. Under an alternative scenario forecast by CRFB, the budget picture looks far worse, boosting deficits nearly $7 trillion higher than the CBO baseline. This scenario would see a significant part of Trump's tariffs canceled if the Court of International Trade's ruling against many of Trump's new tariffs is upheld, cutting $2.4 trillion from revenues over a decade. The alternative scenario also assumes extension of a number of temporary tax cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including tax breaks on overtime, tips, Social Security income and car loan interest, higher state and local tax deduction allowances and full expensing of factory investments, adding $1.7 trillion to deficits over 10 years. CRFB's alternative scenario also ditches the CBO's projection of a decline in 10-year U.S. Treasury yields over the decade to about 3.8%. If that interest rate stays at the current level of about 4.3%, interest costs would grow by about $1.6 trillion through 2035, CRFB said. The total 2035 debt-to-GDP ratio would grow from 118% in the CBO January baseline to 120% under the CRFB's projected baseline scenario and 134% under the CRFB's alternative scenario.
