Latest news with #HazardousWasteManagementPlan
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Politics
- 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
- Politics
- 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.'
San Francisco Chronicle
23-04-2025
- Health
- San Francisco Chronicle
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.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
California regulators want to weaken hazardous waste disposal rules
California environmental regulators are considering rolling back the state's hazardous waste disposal rules, potentially permitting some municipal landfills to accept more contaminated soil from heavily polluted areas. From lead-acid battery smelters to rocket testing facilities, heavy industry over the past century in California has left large swathes of land imbued with dangerous chemicals. As a result, contaminated soil that has been removed during major environmental cleanups or new construction has typically comprised the largest bloc of hazardous waste in California each year. More than 560,000 tons of toxic dirt are excavated every year on average, according to a 2023 DTSC report. The vast majority of this polluted soil would not qualify as hazardous waste outside of California, because the state has more stringent rules than the federal government. But now the California Department of Toxic Substances Control is recommending loosening the state's hazardous waste rules for contaminated soil, arguing that many nonhazardous landfills are adequately equipped to accept chemical-laced dirt, according to an unpublished draft plan obtained by The Times. DTSC spokesperson Alysa Pakkidis said the agency is exploring ways to manage California-only hazardous waste "under different standards while still protecting public health and the environment," as required by a 2021 state law. The agency's recommendations will be detailed in the state's first Hazardous Waste Management Plan, a document that is intended to help guide state strategy on potentially dangerous wastes and which the 2021 law requires be published every three years. The law called for the first version to be published by March 1. But as of March 11, it has still not been posted publicly. The DTSC proposal comes as hazardous waste, namely in the form of soil polluted after the recent L.A. wildfires, has become top of mind. Government agencies are facing blistering criticism over their decision to allow untested — and potentially hazardous — wildfire ash and soil to be disposed of in municipal landfills across Southern California. Environmental groups say allowing nonhazardous waste landfills to accept chemical-laced soil would be a grave mistake. By dumping more toxic substances into the landfills, there's a higher chance of chemicals leaking into groundwater or becoming part of airborne dust blowing into nearby communities. "The reason we established these waste codes was to protect California's groundwater and public health,' said Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics, an environmental nonprofit. 'You can see how effectively [the state is] regulating landfills without the hazardous waste. We're finding vast noncompliance." California's more rigorous hazardous waste standards have led to higher costs for industry and government, as under the current rules, contaminated soil must be transported to a specialized hazardous waste facility in California or hauled to landfills in neighboring states. California currently has only two hazardous waste landfills: Kettleman Hills and Buttonwillow, both in San Joaquin Valley. Oftentimes, contaminated soil is taken to nonhazardous landfills in neighboring states that rely on the more lenient federal standards. The average distance driven to dispose of California-designated hazardous soil is about 440 miles, according to a DTSC draft report. "Because there's only two and they're kind of far away from everything, it is very expensive to take material there,' said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste, a Sacramento-based environmental nonprofit. "So people are always looking for ways to not take material there, and that has sometimes resulted in people taking material out of state." The proposed changes would in theory give private industry a larger selection of in-state landfills to which they could send their waste. DTSC argues that this would result in shorter trucking distances, less air pollution and lower costs. But the state could also see cost savings from relaxing its policies. California has been funding the removal and replacement of soil in neighborhoods around the Exide battery plant in Southeast L.A. County — the state's most expensive cleanup. State contractors are trucking hazardous soil from that site to nonhazardous waste landfills in Utah, Nevada and Arizona — states that rely on the more lenient federal hazardous waste standards. California currently uses three tests to determine whether solid waste is hazardous. One ensures waste doesn't exceed state-established limits for certain toxic substances when the waste is in a solid form. For example, soil with 1,000 parts per million of lead is considered toxic by the state. The other two tests measure the concentration of toxic substances that seep out of solid waste when it is exposed to an acid. These are intended to simulate how solid waste could release chemicals inside the landfill as it's exposed to leachate — liquid waste from rainfall or decomposing garbage. One of these tests is based on federally established methods, and the other is based on the stricter California state-established standards. DTSC recommends allowing contaminated soil that fails the state's leakage test to be dumped at nonhazardous waste landfills, so long as it passes the other two tests. They stressed that hazardous soil would be sent to landfills with liners and leachate collection systems — equipment that gathers and pumps out liquid waste that trickles to the bottom of the dump. Environmental advocates say liner systems can fail when damaged by earthquakes or extreme heat. They argue that sending chemical-laced soil into such systems would eventually imperil groundwater near landfills and could lead to long-term contamination risks. Residents who live near the landfills that are already accepting debris from the Eaton and Palisades wildfires say they are also worried about toxic dust. One of these sites is the Sunshine Canyon Landfill, a 1,036-acre landfill located in a blustery mountain pass in the northeastern San Fernando Valley where gusts often blow dust and odors into nearby communities. The landfill is less than a mile away from a popular recreational area with soccer fields and baseball diamonds. After trucks moved fire debris to the landfill, Erick Fefferman, a resident of nearby Granada Hills, decided against allowing his son to participate in a youth soccer league there this year. "We keep hearing about liners and leachate, but we're not hearing about wind," said Erick Fefferman. "Things don't just sink down — they also get lifted up." Contaminated soil is allowed to be used as "daily cover," a layer of material spread over municipal waste to prevent odors and pests. In a November 2024 meeting, when state officials were asked if California-only hazardous soil could be used as a cover, a DTSC representative said 'it is a consideration." California's hazardous waste laws were first established in 1972 to direct the state to regulate the handling, transportation and disposal of dangerous materials within the state. The state adopted a more rigorous classification system and regulations, including the state leakage test, in the 1980s. Though California's regulations are among the strictest in the nation, they have been loosened over time. In 2021, for example, the state legislature adopted rules allowing for wood coated with toxic metals like chromium and arsenic to be taken to nonhazardous waste facilities. Contaminated soil could be next. DTSC is working to identify regulatory or statutory avenues that would allow for soil that could be contaminated with heavy metals to be dumped at California landfills. To do so, the agency will need the cooperation of the state Water Resources Board and CalRecycle, which regulate nonhazardous waste landfills. Landfill owners would also need to volunteer to accept contaminated soil, according to the DTSC draft plan. The Board of Environmental Safety, a five-member committee that provides oversight of DTSC, will host a series of public meetings on the state's hazardous waste plan. The board is scheduled to vote on whether to approve the plan in July. Environmental advocates say the plans will likely face stiff opposition. "If we need more disposal capacity, maybe we should be requiring everybody to have the same standards as a hazardous waste landfill," said Lapis, the advocacy director for Californians Against Waste. "Deregulation is not the right solution, the fact that they're even proposing it is kind of crazy to me." This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
California regulators want to weaken hazardous waste disposal rules
California environmental regulators are considering rolling back the state's hazardous waste disposal rules, potentially permitting some municipal landfills to accept more contaminated soil from heavily polluted areas. From lead-acid battery smelters to rocket testing facilities, heavy industry over the past century in California has left large swathes of land imbued with dangerous chemicals. As a result, contaminated soil that has been removed during major environmental cleanups or new construction has typically comprised the largest bloc of hazardous waste in California each year. More than 560,000 tons of toxic dirt are excavated every year on average, according to a 2023 DTSC report. The vast majority of this polluted soil would not qualify as hazardous waste outside of California, because the state has more stringent rules than the federal government. But now the California Department of Toxic Substances Control is recommending loosening the state's hazardous waste rules for contaminated soil, arguing that many nonhazardous landfills are adequately equipped to accept chemical-laced dirt, according to an unpublished draft plan obtained by The Times. DTSC spokesperson Alysa Pakkidis said the agency is exploring ways to manage California-only hazardous waste 'under different standards while still protecting public health and the environment,' as required by a 2021 state law. The agency's recommendations will be detailed in the state's first Hazardous Waste Management Plan, a document that is intended to help guide state strategy on potentially dangerous wastes and which the 2021 law requires be published every three years. The law called for the first version to be published by March 1. But as of March 11, it has still not been posted publicly. The DTSC proposal comes as hazardous waste, namely in the form of soil polluted after the recent L.A. wildfires, has become top of mind. Government agencies are facing blistering criticism over their decision to allow untested — and potentially hazardous — wildfire ash and soil to be disposed of in municipal landfills across Southern California. Environmental groups say allowing nonhazardous waste landfills to accept chemical-laced soil would be a grave mistake. By dumping more toxic substances into the landfills, there's a higher chance of chemicals leaking into groundwater or becoming part of airborne dust blowing into nearby communities. 'The reason we established these waste codes was to protect California's groundwater and public health,' said Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics, an environmental nonprofit. 'You can see how effectively [the state is] regulating landfills without the hazardous waste. We're finding vast noncompliance.' California's more rigorous hazardous waste standards have led to higher costs for industry and government, as under the current rules, contaminated soil must be transported to a specialized hazardous waste facility in California or hauled to landfills in neighboring states. California currently has only two hazardous waste landfills: Kettleman Hills and Buttonwillow, both in San Joaquin Valley. Oftentimes, contaminated soil is taken to nonhazardous landfills in neighboring states that rely on the more lenient federal standards. The average distance driven to dispose of California-designated hazardous soil is about 440 miles, according to a DTSC draft report. 'Because there's only two and they're kind of far away from everything, it is very expensive to take material there,' said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste, a Sacramento-based environmental nonprofit. 'So people are always looking for ways to not take material there, and that has sometimes resulted in people taking material out of state.' The proposed changes would in theory give private industry a larger selection of in-state landfills to which they could send their waste. DTSC argues that this would result in shorter trucking distances, less air pollution and lower costs. But the state could also see cost savings from relaxing its policies. California has been funding the removal and replacement of soil in neighborhoods around the Exide battery plant in Southeast L.A. County — the state's most expensive cleanup. State contractors are trucking hazardous soil from that site to nonhazardous waste landfills in Utah, Nevada and Arizona — states that rely on the more lenient federal hazardous waste standards. California currently uses three tests to determine whether solid waste is hazardous. One ensures waste doesn't exceed state-established limits for certain toxic substances when the waste is in a solid form. For example, soil with 1,000 parts per million of lead is considered toxic by the state. The other two tests measure the concentration of toxic substances that seep out of solid waste when it is exposed to an acid. These are intended to simulate how solid waste could release chemicals inside the landfill as it's exposed to leachate — liquid waste from rainfall or decomposing garbage. One of these tests is based on federally established methods, and the other is based on the stricter California state-established standards. DTSC recommends allowing contaminated soil that fails the state's leakage test to be dumped at nonhazardous waste landfills, so long as it passes the other two tests. They stressed that hazardous soil would be sent to landfills with liners and leachate collection systems — equipment that gathers and pumps out liquid waste that trickles to the bottom of the dump. Environmental advocates say liner systems can fail when damaged by earthquakes or extreme heat. They argue that sending chemical-laced soil into such systems would eventually imperil groundwater near landfills and could lead to long-term contamination risks. Residents who live near the landfills that are already accepting debris from the Eaton and Palisades wildfires say they are also worried about toxic dust. One of these sites is the Sunshine Canyon Landfill, a 1,036-acre landfill located in a blustery mountain pass in the northeastern San Fernando Valley where gusts often blow dust and odors into nearby communities. The landfill is less than a mile away from a popular recreational area with soccer fields and baseball diamonds. After trucks moved fire debris to the landfill, Erick Fefferman, a resident of nearby Granada Hills, decided against allowing his son to participate in a youth soccer league there this year. 'We keep hearing about liners and leachate, but we're not hearing about wind,' said Erick Fefferman. 'Things don't just sink down — they also get lifted up.' Contaminated soil is allowed to be used as 'daily cover,' a layer of material spread over municipal waste to prevent odors and pests. In a November 2024 meeting, when state officials were asked if California-only hazardous soil could be used as a cover, a DTSC representative said 'it is a consideration.' California's hazardous waste laws were first established in 1972 to direct the state to regulate the handling, transportation and disposal of dangerous materials within the state. The state adopted a more rigorous classification system and regulations, including the state leakage test, in the 1980s. Though California's regulations are among the strictest in the nation, they have been loosened over time. In 2021, for example, the state legislature adopted rules allowing for wood coated with toxic metals like chromium and arsenic to be taken to nonhazardous waste facilities. Contaminated soil could be next. DTSC is working to identify regulatory or statutory avenues that would allow for soil that could be contaminated with heavy metals to be dumped at California landfills. To do so, the agency will need the cooperation of the state Water Resources Board and CalRecycle, which regulate nonhazardous waste landfills. Landfill owners would also need to volunteer to accept contaminated soil, according to the DTSC draft plan. The Board of Environmental Safety, a five-member committee that provides oversight of DTSC, will host a series of public meetings on the state's hazardous waste plan. The board is scheduled to vote on whether to approve the plan in July. Environmental advocates say the plans will likely face stiff opposition. 'If we need more disposal capacity, maybe we should be requiring everybody to have the same standards as a hazardous waste landfill,' said Lapis, the advocacy director for Californians Against Waste. 'Deregulation is not the right solution, the fact that they're even proposing it is kind of crazy to me.'
