Greenspace

Environmental news from California and beyond

« Previous | Greenspace Home | Next »

City of L.A., Kern County battle over human waste disposal

The U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to review Los Angeles’ claim that a ban on dumping sewage sludge in Kern County violates federal laws has plunged the city into distress over how to dispose of its processed human waste.

The city's petition aimed to quash a Kern County law known as Measure E, approved in 2006 to block Southern California shipments of more than 450,000 tons a year of treated waste, called biosolids, to Green Acres, a farm the city bought in 1999 for about $15 million.

The sludge is tilled into the 4,700-acre farm’s soil to fertilize crops, including corn.

The Supreme Court declined to comment Tuesday, letting stand a previous 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that the city and its allies, including the Orange County Sanitation District, lacked standing to sue under federal commerce law because the case involved transfers from one portion of the state to another.

The case has been sent back to Los Angeles U.S. District Court Judge Gary A. Feess, who must decide whether to maintain jurisdiction over remaining state-level claims or allow a state court to handle them.

The petition claims Measure E is preempted by the California Integrated Waste Management Act, which requires local agencies to recycle their wastes. The petition also claims that the measure exceeds its police powers by exerting authority over another government entity’s operations.

Kern County wants Feess to back out of the case, which would force Los Angeles to start all over again in state court. Los Angeles would prefer that Feess retain jurisdiction and reaffirm his 2007 ruling that struck down the ban as unconstitutional.

Regardless of Feess’ ultimate decision, Ted Jordan, assistant city attorney for Los Angeles, has no intention of dropping his legal challenges against Measure E.

“Our position is that it would be a waste of judicial resources to have this case fully briefed all over again in state court,” he said, “But we will refile in state court if we have to. People have a right to have ballot measures, but local governments cannot go against the state integrated waste management act.”

Kern County officials said the ban was intended to protect underground water and the local environment from possible contamination and emissions from diesel trucks.

However, campaign slogans such as "Measure E will stop L.A. from dumping on Kern," and "We've got the bully next door flinging garbage over his fence into our yard" suggested that law was aimed at slamming the door on Los Angeles’ sludge.

In its petition to the Supreme Court, the city warned that the 9th Circuit's decision, coupled with the Kern County ban, could unleash discriminatory trade war restrictions among municipalities in the same state.

Blocking the sludge transfer also would increase air pollution by forcing city trucks to haul the waste hundreds of miles to landfills in Arizona at an annual cost of more than $4 million.

“We’ve got a $100-million investment in Green Acres,” said former L.A. Deputy City Atty. Keith Pritsker. “There is no way we are going to walk away from it.”

The case is of particular interest to Steve Fan, manager of the 144-acre Hyperion Treatment Plant, the city’s oldest and largest wastewater treatment plant.

Located just south of Los Angeles International Airport, it receives about 350 million gallons of wastewater a day via 6,500 miles of sewage lines. The waste is treated with heat and digested by certain strains of bacteria to produce methane gas, which is used to generate electricity, and a substance Fan described as “clumpy and very dark with the consistency of wet cake."

“Each day, 28 trucks depart in the early morning hours -- when there is less traffic -- with a total 630 tons of wet cake,” he said. “By the time it is applied to the land at Green Acres, it is a steaming 120 degrees. It meets all state and federal requirements for bacterial counts and heavy metals. The farm is surrounded with a 500-foot-wide buffer zone.”

-- Louis Sahagun

 
Comments () | Archives (4)

The comments to this entry are closed.

I am concerned about the accuracy of some of the figures you presented here. For example, my understanding was that Green Acres Farm was purchased at 9.6 million, but in your article you claim it was purchased at 15 million. This is a difference of more than 5 million dollars! Could you confirm your source?

The State of Colorado has recently banned or suspended the use of Biosolids on over 1,000 acres of farmland here in Boulder County.An important buffer to ground water was alledgedly not being met and the biosolids potentially endangered aquifers and wells.
We were all told that this was "highly regulated" and completely safe.
One of the suspensions occurred on a farm that recieved bio solids for almost 20 years.
Not one fine has been issued and no water has been tested for contamination."Self regulation",which is how the biosolids system is set up,is NO regulation.

The Kern County sludge control ordinance complies with both California law and federal sludge laws:

Water Code Section 13274, Subdivision i gives California counties the
right to regulate sewage sludge:


(i) Nothing in this section restricts the authority of a local
government agency to regulate the application of sewage sludge and other biological solids to land within the jurisdiction of that agency, including, but not limited to, the planning authority of the Delta Protection Commission, the resource management plan of which is required to be implemented by local government general plans.


*************************************************************************************************************************

FEDERAL LAWS:

Federal Clean Water Act - “disposal or use of sludge is a LOCAL determination”
Title 33, Chapter 26, Subchapter IV, Sec. 1345 – Disposal or use of sewage sludge

40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) part 501.1 State Sludge Management Program Regulations

(i) Nothing in this part precludes a State or political subdivision thereof, or interstate agency, from adopting or enforcing requirements established by State or local law that are more stringent or more extensive than those required in this part or in any other federal statute or regulation.

Then 40 CFR Section 503.5, carves out authority for the State or any subdivision thereof (the local government) to impose additional or more stringent requirements:

(b) Nothing in this part precludes a State or political subdivision thereof or interstate agency from
imposing requirements for the use or disposal of sewage sludge more stringent than the requirements in this part or from imposing additional requirements for the use or disposal of sewage sludge. (comment: a "political subdivision" of a state is a town, county, city, parish, township, etc.)

For more information on the rights of communities to enact local sludge rules more stringent than federal sludge rules:
http://www.nidellaw.com/blog/?p=17 and http://sludgevictims.com/local-determination.html

The New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld local sludge control as being authorized by federal law, and ruled that the Town of Tilton, NH could ban the land application of Class B sewage sludge. http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2004/thaye134.htm

Other California Counties with sludge control ordinances include:

Complete Ban (4): Sutter San Joaquin Stanislaus Santa Cruz

Effective Ban (8): Monterey San Benito Yuba Glenn Imperial San Luis Obispo San Bernadino Ventura

Regulated Use (8): (many of these are bans on Class B sewage sludge)
Solono Merced Yolo Kern Riversiide Tulare Fresno Kings

Oh I love it! L.A. has no place to dump it's "biosolids", except for Arizona, which they've voted to boycott. Go Kern County! May Arizona refuse to accept their biosolids so they are dumped in the council chambers and in the yards of the council members and mayor instead.


Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video

Recent News
Invitation to connect on LinkedIn |  December 12, 2013, 9:58 am »
New Cook Islands Shark Sanctuary proposed |  December 8, 2011, 8:00 am »

Categories


Archives