Solid Waste
Management Program
- About our Program
- Commissions and Boards
- Composting
- Financial Assistance and Information
- Forms and Permits
- Illegal Dumping
- Kids Page
- Laws and Regulations
- Links of Interest
- Permitted Facilities
- Publications and Reports
- Reduce, Reuse and Recycle
- Rules
- Solid Waste Management Districts
- Tires
- Training Opportunities
- Worms
Solid Waste Advisory Board
Meeting Summary
Solid Waste Advisory Board Meeting
Bennett Springs Room
1738 E. Elm Street
Jefferson City, MO
July 7, 2004
1:00 p.m.
Designated Alternates DNR Staff |
DNR Staff continued Others SWAB Members Absent |
District Roll Call - Chairman Scott Murrell called the meeting to order. There was a quorum.
Approval of July Agenda - There was one addition to the July agenda. Ms. Linda Glaus moved to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. Ray Beck seconded and the motion carried.
Approval of June Meeting Summary - Mr. Harland Mieser moved to approve the June meeting summary. Mr. Robert O'Keefe seconded and the motion carried.
1. New Business
A. Award Presentation
Ms. Cynthia Mitchell, President, Missouri Recycling Association Board(MORA), presented Mr. Dennis Sieders with MORA's President's Award. This is awarded to an individual who has made a difference in waste reduction and recycling over the past year. He helped MORA do waste audit workshops throughout the state.
B. Sunshine Law
Mr. Tim Duggan, Assistant Attorney General, presented information to the board on Senate Bill 1020, and additional information pertaining to open records. The sunshine law was amended to bring it up to date. Conference calls, video conferencing, internet chats and message boards are included in this bill.
One change to the law was for public records. The term "public record" previously excluded certain memo's that were provided under private contract to a board (certain communications or studies). These are now open records even though they are the product of consulting or advising services to a particular agency, commission or board.
You can now have a public vote by telephone or other electronic means.
Section 610.015 is a provision that requires members of public governmental bodies who are elected, to be present to vote. This does not apply to this board, because the board is not elected to be on the board. This applies to someone who is elected to a job that they are serving in, for the purpose of voting regarding that job. SWAB members are an appointed board. This requirement excludes general assembly members.
Minutes of closed meetings must be maintained. One way to maintain minutes for these meetings is to have the attorney keep notes and have them available in the event an audit was to be performed. These minutes need not contain privileged information, just an entry that the conversation occurred and that the subject was proper for a closed meeting.
There was a significant change in the penalties for violations of the sunshine law. The penalties are much more severe. Copies of the updated sunshine law pamphlets will be provided to the board when they are published.
Chairman Murrell asked if the board should be keeping records of votes by person or are the votes okay as long as they are unanimous. Mr. Duggan stated that as long as they are unanimous it's fine. If anyone abstains or votes no, it shall be recorded. A role call vote is not needed on every piece of business as long as the record is clear.
Ms. Linda Glaus asked if there was any specific instance when there should be a roll call vote. Mr. Duggan stated there is no specific instance. It is a matter of clarifying in the minutes what the vote was. The sunshine law doesn't pinpoint anything specific that requires roll call vote.
Mr. Randolph stated that if there are some yes and some no votes, we will ask to stop and take a roll call vote to provide an accurate record. The legislature and the governor have decided that this is an important issue and we want to err on the side of safety and openness.
Mr. Duggan clarified that if it is unclear which side had the most votes, that this would be the time a roll call vote is needed. Do the practical thing, as long as it is clear for the record.
Mr. Randolph added that the law provides that when the meeting minutes are in draft, they are available upon request.
Ms. Lynda Roehl asked if you "knowingly" have to know that the vote
was incorrect in order to be in trouble. For example wouldn't you have
to prove that someone "knowingly" did it in order for you to have to
pay a fine?
Mr. Duggan noted that the fines mostly deal with failing to make a record
available at all. If you have to be brought into court in order to be
compelled to follow the law, you could be liable for penalties for wrongfully
withholding the information and possibly the other side's attorney's
fees as well.
Ms. Roehl asked if you are doing the things you think you need to do,
someone would have to prove that a person "knowingly" did it wrong.
Mr. Duggan stated the word "purposeful" has been inserted instead
of "knowingly." It could be read that the intent is to get around
the sunshine law. If you are trying deliberately to violate the sunshine
law, that is a much bigger deal. It is easy to accidentally violate
the sunshine law.
Mr. Ray Beck stated that this law has a lot more implication than most people realize. Maybe not to the SWAB, but to the municipal league. They opposed this law, not because of openness, but because of the way it is written, and because it excludes the general assembly.
Mr. Beck asked if e-mails sent to a majority of a group needs to be
maintained somewhere. For example, if e-mail was sent asking this group
to vote on a particular officer, how would this be handled? Mr. Duggan
stated we always assume the e-mail is an open record. If you are asked
to produce it, you have to produce it. Even though it is cumbersome
to comply with the request.
Mr. Beck stated he thought people could innocently do some of these
things and actually violate the sunshine law if there is not a central
location where these records are kept.
Mr. Beck asked who would be the record keeper for the SWAB. Mr. Duggan stated that the office of information systems maintains any electronic e-mail that goes through the department. If anyone in the department is copied on e-mail it is in the departments electronic records.
Mr. Duggan stated that if members of the board are sending messages to each other in the way of a conversation, for example an instant message, and it isn't part of an officially called meeting, it's discussion between meetings that is acceptable. If it is a video conference, teleconference, or internet chat where you all agreed you were going to be on line at the same time conducting official business as an official body the conference/teleconference would be subject to posting a 24-hour advanced notice and must make it accessible for the public to participate. Mr. Beck stated it is important that you don't put in writing what you don't want to see in print. Mr. Duggan stated a lot of the time it is an individual judgement call, but there is significance to the word purposeful verses knowingly. If you are not purposefully trying to get around the sunshine law, you are just trying to conduct your business; you would have some defense.
Ms. Lisa Danbury asked for clarification for the solid waste district
board. Does this section about being present to vote apply to the district
board?
Mr. Randolph stated it does as an example, if Board members are elected
as a county commissioner, they must be present to vote on an issue
before the county commission, but those who are elected to a board
office such as Chair or Vice Chair, appointed to a district board,
do not. Mr. Duggan stated this section was probably directed towards
city councils and things like that.
Mr. Duggan stated this targets elected officials. It doesn't allow them to delegate or pass their vote on to someone else. Everyone else should follow Roberts Rules of Order.
Mr. Duggan was asked if a group or body was one person short of a quorum, can you call an absent person for a vote on the telephone. Mr. Duggan stated no, unless the person is part of a quorum for the whole meeting. If a member of a commission or board participates by telephone conference from a remote location then that is considered a quorum, but to just call when you don't have a quorum to be able to vote shouldn't be risked.
Mr. Duggan provided a hand out. (Attachment A) Mr. Duggan asked that questions be collected and sent to him and he will get back to the SWAB with answers.
Ms. Glaus asked for a final clarification on roll call voting. If there are some no votes and some yes votes, will the board do a roll cal vote? Mr. Randolph stated yes, so we have a clear record of who voted for or against the issue. This will make clear for anyone wanting to review the record, how each district or industry representative voted on the issue. Ms. Glaus state this was a good idea.
C. Boards and Commissions Operating Policy
Mr. Randolph informed the board about a workgroup meeting conducted in recent months that applies mostly to commissioners. The Commissioners Core Workgroup met to address issues that primarily were raised by industry concerning the lack of consistency among the commissions. The policy was mailed to the members with the July SWAB information. This is good guidance for boards as well as commissions. If there are any questions or clarifications the program will try to get someone to come to a future meeting to provided additional information.
D. School Lab Project Presentation
Mr. Earl Pabst, Director, Environmental Services Program (ESP) introduced Mr. Eric Sappington, ESP.
Mr. Sappington became involved with the Center for Safe Schools this past year. The center is housed at the University of Missouri, Kansas City. The workgroup includes representatives from the Departments of Health and Senior Services, Elementary and Secondary Education, State Fire Marshall's Office, University of Missouri Extension Service, and Kansas City Household Hazardous Waste Center. Several high schools and universities are also represented on this workgroup.
The group was brought together with one goal, that goal is to help make schools a safer place. Hands on science experiments are an important way for children to learn science, but sometimes educators don't know enough about properly managing and storing the hazardous chemicals they use.
Part of the pilot project conducted this spring was to visit six different schools. An inventory of the chemicals each school had on hand was taken and also to see the way they are being stored. The schools have a wide variety of chemicals, most are in storerooms adjacent to classrooms. Most aren't kept locked and in some cases students have access to these rooms.
Part of the problem is education and part of the problem is funding. Schools can't afford to bring in the services of an environmental consultant to help them manage their chemical storage. A lot of the schools have large amounts of chemicals in storage, some in containers 20-30 years old that should be properly disposed.
The pilot project is tasked with coming up with cost estimates on what it might take to run a statewide project where an agency would go in and help the schools with a one-time disposal. At this time no agency has been asked to administering this program
There is also a CD that is being developed that will be distributed to school administrators and science teachers. It will be very comprehensive and will provide tools to help manage the chemicals properly.
The pilot project will provide a list of the dangerous chemicals and the group will suggest to the schools that have them, how to properly dispose of them. If a school is considering purchasing one of the chemicals, the pilot project suggests justification to their administrators since in most cases there is a different type of experiment using a less hazardous chemical. Mercury is one example of a dangerous chemical that has a safe substitute. In some cases it can be very, very expensive to clean up a mercury spill.
Mr. Sappington went on to say that they are still seeking funding and he asked the board to contact him with any ideas or questions.
E. Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) Workgroup
Ms. Darleen Groner, Hazardous Waste Program, presented information on CESQG - those that generate or accumulate less than 2.2 pounds of acutely hazardous waste or 220 pounds of other hazardous waste per month or at any one time. Under federal law these generators may either treat or dispose of their waste onsite or insure delivery to an offsite treatment storage or disposal facility which is a RCRA permitted hazardous facility, a resource recovery facility which has also been approved by the Hazardous Waste Program, a sanitary landfill or another facility approved by the state. Missouri law however, states that it is illegal to dispose of this in a Missouri sanitary landfill.
This law reduces the amount of toxic material going into trash trucks, transfer stations and landfills. It does however make things more difficult for Missouri businesses, especially the small businesses that are conditionally exempt.
The Hazardous Waste Program has formed a workgroup consisting of staff from HWP and SWMP, household hazardous waste facilities, industry representatives and many other interested parties. The first meeting is set for July 27, 2004, from 1:30 to 4:30 at the Elm Street Conference Center in Jefferson City.
The Solid Waste Program will be participating in the workgroup. The Solid Waste Program will be considering a proposed rule for household hazardous waste collections. Currently household hazardous waste collection facilities have no technical review prior to operation.
If supported by the workgroup, the Solid and Hazardous Waste Programs' plan to pursue a joint rulemaking effort regarding household hazardous waste and CESQG waste. The solid waste effort would be directed towards developing regulations that will help establish household hazardous waste collection centers that are operated safely and provide individuals greater access to recycling and reuse alternatives to landfill disposal.
The hazardous waste effort would be aimed at specific regulatory requirements for facilities that accept CESQG waste. By combining these efforts the programs hope to provide more opportunity for both businesses and homeowners to handle their hazardous waste an in environmentally safe manner. We believe this approach will protect human health and the environment, provide a more convenient means for the average citizen to safely reuse, recycle and dispose of their household hazardous waste.
With this effort we hope to address some of the economic inequity that exists between small businesses and individual citizens. State law prohibits sanitary landfills in Missouri from accepting CESQG waste, however the law does not ban household hazardous waste. As a result, someone engaging in hobby or maintenance work at home generating small amounts of hazardous waste can dispose of this in their trash. Businesses generating the same small amount have to dispose of theirs by taking it to a hazardous waste facility.
These new hazardous waste regulations will provide a process for managing these wastes safely by establishing minimum requirements with safe handling without the necessity of a full RCRA Hazardous Waste Permit. This in turn should help small businesses manage their CESQG waste safely, legally and in a more economical manner.
Household hazardous waste facilities are not required to get approval to operate. State hazardous waste law states that recycling facilities are exempt from permitting requirements. After closer review of the facilities, some of the materials collected are being neutralized, washed down the drain, or disposed of either by landfill as miscellaneous trash or incinerated.
These facilities can be large; handling very hazardous materials, so creating some type of approval process with minimal requirements and safe handling of household hazardous waste would be beneficial for everyone. We are still looking for workgroup participants. Information was made available for anyone interested.
Many states have tried to hook CESQG collection and disposal to household hazardous waste. We are trying to develop CESQG disposal facilities and try to incorporate household in to that. We are bringing this to the SWAB because some districts are already doing household hazardous waste and SWAB input is needed.
Chairman Murrell stated that he believes in household hazardous waste programs and would like to see the more of them done. You must make sure you don't inadvertently become a large quantity generator. If you are not a residential entity and you somehow get your hands on 221 pound of hazardous waste, you will spend the rest of you time working full time as a hazardous waste specialist, whether you want to or not. There are three people working for him full time to manage all of the intricacies you get into if you become a large quantity generator. It would be tragic if one of the districts or recycling centers tripped that trigger and fell into the large quantity generator even though they were trying to do the right thing. It is important that we keep household hazardous waste, truly household hazardous. Chairman Murrell encouraged participation in this workgroup, since SWAB could have an opportunity to help shape the rule.
Ms. Glaus asked what the definition of household hazardous waste was.
Mr. Murrell stated it needs to come from a residence. Ms. Groner added
that she thought schools were conditionally exempt. Ms. Glaus asked,
if a hauler picks up household trash and are contracted to do that,
does the city have to have a household hazardous waste hauler or would
industry have to become a household hazardous waste hauler. Ms. Glaus
also asked if small generators of infectious waste were considered
on this? Is there funding available for this through the hazardous
waste program? The tonnage fee is to address solid waste and household
hazardous waste, it's not meant to address hazardous waste.
Mr. Randolph stated that infectious waste has its own definition, it's
not hazardous waste. Ms. Groner answered Ms. Glaus's other questions.
She stated that the rulemaking is for facilities, cities or counties
that want to create a facility for household hazardous waste or for
conditionally exempt waste. The Solid and Hazardous Waste Programs have
no means to be paying for that. Trash haulers are not affected by this
rule, just collection centers.
Ms. Groner stated that by having this rule, it will allow facilities
to offset some of their costs by charging for conditionally exempt
waste.
Ms. Groner clarified that if this waste is being picked up and accumulated in large quantities, you have to be a manifested transporter to pickup.
Ms. Beth Marsala pointed out that this rule is offered as an opportunity for people who don't want to put their household hazardous waste in the trash. Household hazardous waste is still exempt; there is no minimum. For businesses, if you generate anything, it has to go to a hazardous waste facility. It cannot be put in the trash.
Mr. Randolph stated we didn't plan to change the law, we just want to find a way to provide a better disposal option for household hazardous waste. We hope in this process, to provide cheaper disposal for conditionally exempt small quantity generators. This is not to usurp anything that is already going on. Kansas City and St. Charles have good programs already. We want everything to fit together and not overlap.
F. Election of Officers
After re-checking the by-laws, the program found that only the primary member of the board is allowed to be an officer on the SWAB. Voting alternates cannot serve as officers. Voting alternates that were nominated were taken off the ballot.
It was also pointed out that only board members or their voting alternate are able to vote.
Mr. Wagner asked if nominations could be made from the floor. After checking, bylaws state nominations from the floor will also be allowed. The question was then asked if write-in candidates are allowed. Mr. Duggan clarified write-ins are allowed. The floor was opened for nominations.
Mr. Wagner nominated Harry Rogers. However, Mr. Rogers is not eligible because he in not the primary member of his district board, he is the voting alternate.
It was suggested that all members or their voting alternate be at the table.
Mr. Beck suggested that before a name is placed on the ballot, they be contacted to see if they are willing to serve. Mr. Randolph noted that we see omissions in the by-laws, we are trying to follow the statutes and by-laws. This may be something that should be brought up as a by-law issue. Staff would welcome a review of the by-laws to clarify these kinds of issues.
Ballots were tabulated; Mr. Tim Smith was voted Chair. Mr. Ray Beck was voted Vice-Chair.
2. Old Business
A. Funding for Districts
Mr. Pat Muck updated the SWAB on the timing of funding due to SB1040.
Mr. Muck handed out information (Attachment B) on district allocations
for FY2005 and information on how to apply for district operating
funds.
SB 1040 allows for 40 percent to be paid for district operations. Districts must still apply through a grant for district operation money, but don't compete for the money for operations. This portion being applied for does not have to be competitively ranked if you are applying for district operation money. The remaining 60 percent does need to be competitively ranked.
Mr. Randolph explained that districts are able to make application
now, but statute won't allow for the money to be drawn on until August
28, in a noncompetitive process. The remaining amount, the districts
will need to apply for through the regular competitive process as they
always have.
3. Other Business
A. Director's Report
Mr. Randolph provided a list of suggested members of the Interim Committee.
Mr. Campbell stated that the members of the House have not been confirmed.
(Since the meeting the committee has been confirmed.) The members
are:
REPRESENTATIVES
Charles Schlottach, Chair District 111
Jason Brown District 30
Bill Deeken District 114
Jim Whorton District 3
Patricia Yaeger District 96
SENATORS
John Griesheimer, Co-Chair District 26
Patrick Dougherty District 4
Bill Foster District 25
David Klindt District 12
Steve Stoll District 22
Next Board Meetings - Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2004
Chairman Smith asked what was on the agenda for the Aug. 4, 2004, meeting and if there was a need for a meeting in August. After some discussion, it was decided to keep the regular scheduled meeting in order to discuss interim committee issues.
Ms. Glaus clarified a statement from the June meeting. She stated that Mr. Bill Gambel worked for the regional planning commissions, but he actually works for the Missouri Association of Councils of Government (MACOG).
Upcoming meeting dates, please mark your calendar.
Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2004
Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2004
Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2004
Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2004
Adjourn - Chairman Smith adjourned the meeting at 2:40
