October 30, 2017 | Author: Anonymous | Category: N/A
Chor-Fung Chia . Provedor, Jennifer Chia Gmail ......
From: Sarath A J Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:24 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Please Disapprove Newby Landfill Expansion Inbox x Since the odor is miserable day after day and our kids are suffering from it, please use the best judgement in favor of the community for landfill expansion.Request you to stop the landfill expansion for the living community than the corporate profits. Think about you living in these areas and suffering the odor. We all know that the odor is coming from Newby Island but we are trying to manipulate the facts We need to have a remedy measure at the earliest for the best interest of community. There were 120 confirmed report from last 6 months from Bay Area Air Quality Management (Attached is the report) Sarath John 211 smith wood street Milpitas
From: Shyju Kozhukkunnon Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 4:11 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: File No: PD14-014 - Landfill expansion Hi Rebecca, I am the owner and resident of 440 Alegra Ter Milpitas CA. I am affected by the odor and bad air quality due to Newby island landfill and would oppose the expansion of landfill any more. Regards, Shyju Kozhukkunnon
From: Venkat Ramakrishnan Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 4:34 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Cc:
[email protected] Subject: Newby expansion Hello, As residents of Warmsprings who have been significantly impacted by the foul order and air pollution of newby landfill, we request you to not approve any more expansion to the landfill and hold Republic Services accountable for causing so much odor, it has made most of warmsprings in Fremont drenched in foul odor through out the year. As the city council meets today, we are hoping to hear positive news that the council does not approve any further expansion of the landfill Best Regards, Venkat Ramakrishnan 48434 Craycroft Court Fremont CA
From: District 10 Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 6:05 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: FW: Please save Almaden! We need to expand Newby landfill Letter regarding item 4.c. on tonight’s agenda – PD14-014 From: Nak Kim [mailto:
[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 4:36 PM To: District 10 Subject: Please save Almaden! We need to expand Newby landfill
Dear Mr. Khamis, I am a resident in Almaden valley and proud of your service in the District 10. I'm sure you are fully aware of developments regarding the WM landfill and City of Milpitas and its harmful affects to the residents in Almaden valley. Please support San Jose residents and District 10 neighbors' effort to protect Almaden valley from the Milpitas garbage. In order to do that, we first have to vote and pass the expansion of Newby Island landfill at tomorrow's San Jose Planning Commission's hearing. WE WANT Newby Island landfill expanded! Our family and all the neighbors in the Almaden Valley are following this issue very closely. We all want our district representative to take proactive stand on this matter to protect Almaden Valley and serve the people of San Jose. Thank you for your service. We all really appreciate it. Sincerely, Nak Kim
From: Ana B Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 3:21 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Newby Landfill
All, Please do not extend the Newby landfill. I work at McCarthy Ranch - at KLA Tencor. The smell from the dump is so bad it makes sitting outside to eat your lunch unbearable. It is a talking point around campus here. It is really disgusting. Not sure how anyone could let this go through. It is outrageous. I also live in Warm Springs in Fremont. On a warm summer day we can smell the dump. Please help preserve our quality of life. Extending the dump would make it unbearable. Thanks Ana Schuman (Fremont resident - Warm Springs) (Milpitas employee)
From: Olga * Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 5:55 PM To: Berry, Whitney Subject: No to landfill expansion I am sick of living at a luxury community, pay exuberant rent and being exposed to disgusting stench! I can only imagine how many toxins and molds it brings as it is! Absolutely NO on further extension till you can provide a sealed containment for this nuisance. Sincerely, Olga Ortmann
From: David Yan [mailto:
[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 10:01 PM To: The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo ; Khamis, Johnny ;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Cc: City Clerk ; David Yan Subject: Please don't let Newby trash come to Almaden valley residential area
Dear Mayor, Mr. Khamis and San Jose planning committee, I am writing this email to you to express my concerns on more trash might be sent to Almaden valley if the city of San Jose does not take necessary actions against it or does not make correct decisions on a few key issues. As a resident of the Almaden valley, I have been closely watching the progress of Milpitas' awarding of its MSW dumping to Waster Management's Guadalupe Mines landfill. I was disappointed to learn that Militas' Measure L passed in November's election,which makes their contract with WM a done deal on their side. I am very glad to learn that our city had taken actions to make sure the city of Milpitas performs necessary environmental impact study before they can transfer their trash across the city of San Jose to the Guadalupe Mines landfill. I learned that our planning committee will make a decision on December 7th to determine if additional capacity should be granted to Newby landfill after their current permitted capacity is used up in 2025. I'd like to remind you that when making such a decision please keep in mind that Guadalupe Mines landfill can not/should not be an alternative for the trash that currently goes to Newby. As you are very well aware, the Guadalupe Mines landfill is next to the residential area with hundreds of houses. More importantly, it is the only landfill in the Bay Area which shares a narrow (one lane) access road with hundreds of residents. The Milpitas trash alone will add 30+ eighteen wheelers to such an access road everyday. This is a nightmare for the families living in that area. Since Milpitas trash is only a very small portion of the Newby trash, I cannot imagine what could happen if we shut the Newby without a plan for the trash to go. I know that Milpitas residents have been protesting about the odor of the Newby and demand it to be closed. If the trash is a true source of the odor, it does not make sense to move the trash to Guadalupe Mines landfill, which is closer to a highly dense residential zone. Please help the Almaden residents to prevent Milpitas trash to come to Guadalupe Mines landfill, and more importantly, Almaden valley should not be a substitute for the Newby landfill. Thank you very much for your reading my email. Regards,
David Yan Almaden Valley resident
From: Jeff Gordon Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 4:36 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Cc: Stephanie Gordon Subject: Newby Landfill Expansion Dear San Jose Mayor, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members, This is Jeff Gordon along with 18,000 online and 5000 paper petition signers asking for No on Newby Landfill Expansion Approval. I am writing this letter to urge you to reject the Newby Landfill expansion application at the scheduled December 7th planning committee meeting. Newby Landfill got 11 public nuisance tickets, 6 odor NOVs from gas leaking, MRF, and compost in 17 months; an average of once a month (Note: these numbers are from the latest Odor Study Report)! The environmental impact is very significant! According to the CEQA guidelines, no new project with a significant environmental impact can be approved. The research found that 44 landfills in the SF bay were closed when reaching their max capacity. Newby Landfill, with such poor operating records, should be closed at its max capacity with no exception! Other than the odor issue, the problem of groundwater contamination underneath the Newby Landfill by a carcinogenic substance is a big alert to the public health. The groundwater testing results in 2015 and in 2016 show that the groundwater contamination is speeding up: from 30 ug/L increasing to 92 ug/L, according to the water testing report from SF water board. In my opinion, and I hope you will agree with me, that protecting public health is the indisputable duty of government officials. All officials with authority to approve any project with environmental impacts should follow the CEQA guidelines and San Jose municipal codes. If Newby Landfill with 11 public nuisance tickets and the evidence of increased groundwater contamination deserves an expansion, then all other 44 closed landfills deserve to be reopened and expanded! If Newby Landfill gets an expansion approval by your votes, you will be the one opening the Pandora Box of landfills. “Given the County Health Department’s assessment of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill odors affecting the health of residents, it is unconscionable that the city should continue to dump its trash there,” Englander said in a statement. “With over 9,000 odor complaints since 2009, Republic Services has proven they are incapable of controlling odors from the site.” (LA leader moves to shut down Sunshine Canyon Landfill, By Gregory J. Wilcox, Los Angeles Daily News 11/04/16) WasteDive.com also released news that Tullytown Landfill in PA will be closed in 2 years. The landfill operators were working on mitigating odors but all failed; therefore Pennsylvania EPA ordered the landfill to shut down. Newby Landfill is very similar to Tullytown Landfill. Both landfills are located close to multiple cities and towns. Both landfills are located upwind of residential areas. Both Landfills cause serious public nuisance. Both landfills have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. Now Tullytown Landfill was ordered to shut down. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! When you vote on the Newby Landfill Expansion, please take public health and CEQA guidelines into your consideration. Sincerely,
-Jeff Gordon Mobile: 408-365-1500
[email protected]
From: Jim Li Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:44 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected]; Michelle Yesney;
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo Subject: Please Do not Expand Newby Island Landfill Dear San Jose Mayor Liccardo, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members, This is Jim Li, living in Silicon Valley. I am writing this letter to urge you to reject the Newby Landfill expansion application at the scheduled December 7th planning committee meeting. Newby Landfill has got 11 public nuisance tickets, 6 odor NOVs from gas leaking, MRF, and compost in 17 months; an average of once a month (Note: these numbers are from the latest Odor Study Report)! The environmental impact is very significant! According to the CEQA guidelines, no new project with a significant environmental impact can be approved. The research found that 44 landfills in the SF bay were closed when reaching their max capacity. Newby Landfill, with such poor operating records, should be closed at its max capacity with no exception! Other than the odor issue, the problem of groundwater contamination underneath the Newby Landfill by a carcinogenic substance is a big alert to the public health. The groundwater testing results in 2015 and in 2016 show that the groundwater contamination is speeding up: from 30 ug/L increasing to 92 ug/L, according to the water testing report from SF water board. In my opinion, and I hope you will agree with me, that protecting public health is the indisputable duty of government officials. All officials with authority to approve any project with environmental impacts should follow the CEQA guidelines and San Jose municipal codes. If Newby Landfill with 11 public nuisance tickets and the evidence of increased groundwater contamination deserves an expansion, then all other 44 closed landfills deserve to be reopened and expanded! If Newby Landfill gets an expansion approval by your votes, you will be the one opening the Pandora Box of landfills. “Given the County Health Department’s assessment of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill odors affecting the health of residents, it is unconscionable that the city should continue to dump its trash there,” Englander said in a statement. “With over 9,000 odor complaints since 2009, Republic Services has proven they are incapable of controlling odors from the site.” (LA leader moves to shut down Sunshine Canyon Landfill, By Gregory J. Wilcox, Los Angeles Daily News 11/04/16) WasteDive.com also released news that Tullytown Landfill in PA will be closed in 2 years. The landfill operators were working on mitigating odors but all failed; therefore Pennsylvania EPA ordered the landfill to shut down. Newby Landfill is very similar to Tullytown Landfill. Both landfills sit at multi cities and towns. Both landfills are located upwind of residential areas. Both Landfills cause serious public nuisance. Both landfills have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. Now Tullytown Landfill was ordered to shut down. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! When you vote on the Newby Landfill Expansion, please take public health and CEQA guidelines into your consideration. Sincerely, Jim Li, resident of Silicon Valley
From: Gerry McFaull Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 9:36 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney;
[email protected] Subject: Newby Island
Dear San Jose Planning Commission and Staff, REF: Newby Island Landfill: Please stop any plans to expand or extend the operational plans for Newby Island Landfill. In fact, the sooner the dump closes the better. It’s a matter of legal record that the landfill is a public nuisance and is contaminating the local groundwater. I can tell you from personal experience that when the landfill stink is blowing towards my home, we must shelter in place. The smell is overpowering, disgusting and cannot be tolerated. Frankly it’s a public disgrace and I’m absolutely stunned that you are considering making things worse by increasing the size and years of operation of this blight on local homes and families. I appeal to you to use your good conscience and respect for your neighbors; please take responsibility and change your discussion from increasing the size of the dump to closing it down asap. Thank you. Gerry McFaull Qualdeval International US and International Sourcing Specialists Ph: 1 (510) 468 3854 www.qualdeval.com
From: Chen Yinlu Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 1:29 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; Oliverio, Pierluigi; District2; District3; District4; District7; Herrera, Rose; District 10; District9 Subject: STOP the Newby landfill expansion Dear San Jose Mayor, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members,
here is the evidence that the landfill is too old and broken and should retiring..... From your own report.....
From: priya Sendil Vijay Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:37 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected]; Michelle Yesney;
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Newby Island - Please vote against expansion Hi, Please vote against Newby expansion and protect residents living around the area from harmful chemicals and odour. Do we wait for decades to see a generation getting ruined? Please vote with the 100's of thousands of people including kids and their health and future in mind. Thanks Priya
From: Mindy Z Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 7:39 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5;
[email protected]; District7; District8; District9; District 10;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Roberts, Rachel Subject: Pls stop Newby garbage extension Dear San Jose Council Members, I am writing to you to pledge you NOT to approve the Newby Island Garbage Extension. Being the center of Silicon Valley, San Jose should not be memorized by its bad odor. Please do not make people remember you because you approve an extension whenever they smell something. Thank you! Mindy Sent from my iPhone
From: frank Lin Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 10:33 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5;
[email protected]; District7; District8; District9; District 10;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Roberts, Rachel Subject: Don't be the next Flint in Michigan. Hi all, My name is Frank, a Milpitas resident. I just want to give you guys some infomation before the 12/7 meeting. Please consider the following. Your help will be high appreaciated. As you know Republic Services had 11 public nuisance tickets and the ground water 1,4 dioxane level is 3X than 2015. This is very dangerous to the people live in south bay area. Please stop the Newby Island extension permit to the RS. Enough is enough! It's time for the Newby to retire! God bless!! Regards and thanks, Frank
From: Lily Lin Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 10:38 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo Subject: Please stop Newby Island Please stop Newby Island. We all need clean air, water!! Thanks, Lily
From: Ashit Ghevaria Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 11:29 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Cc: Ro Khanna Subject: No reason to allow Newby Island Expansion.. Dear officials from SJ City planning Besides all the reasons of not allowing Newby island since it's causing so much of environmental pollution and Newby island is declared a public nuisance, there is a breaking news... http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/30/sunnyvale-council-oks-negotiations-with-milpitas-for-use-ofsmart-station/
Sunnyvale: Council OKs negotiations with Milpitas for use of SMaRT station "On Tuesday, Sunnyvale City Council voted unanimously to start negotiations with Milpitas to use the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer Station at 301 Carl Road, north of state Route 237, under its contract with Garden City." "Stufflebean said if Milpitas did start sending its waste to be sorted at the SMaRT station it would have to send any waste that is not diverted to Kirby Canyon Landfill in Morgan Hill — owned and operated by Waste Management Inc. — instead of that company’s Guadalupe Mines Road landfill in South San Jose." It is a great News for residents next to the Newby Landfill and the Guadalupe landfill! Since the city of Milpitas has chosen Sunnyvale SMaRt station to sort our city garbage, after sorting, Milpitas' garbage would have to send to Kirby Canyon Landfill, not Guadalupe landfill. Therefore, the city of San Jose does not need to approve Newby Landfill expansion . Please REJECT any request to allow NEWBY Island expansion on December 7th. Let's make bay areas Zero Waste & Green for generations to come !! Thanks in advance for your kind consideration.
-Best Regards, Ashit Ghevaria (Resident of Milpitas 408-313-9933 )
From: Pierre Chor-Fung Chia Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 5:58 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Please listen to your fellow San Jose Residents and REJECT NewBy Landfill Expansion Proposal Dear San Jose Mayor, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members, I am in agreement with Jennifer Strohfus, she is representing 18,000 online and 5000 paper petition signers asking for No on Newby Landfill Expansion Approval. I am writing this letter to urge you to reject the Newby Landfill expansion application at the scheduled December 7th planning committee meeting. Newby Landfill got 11 public nuisance tickets, 6 odor NOVs from gas leaking, MRF, and compost in 17 months; an average of once a month (Note: these numbers are from the latest Odor Study Report)! The environmental impact is very significant! According to the CEQA guidelines, no new project with a significant environmental impact can be approved. The research found that 44 landfills in the SF bay were closed when reaching their max capacity. Newby Landfill, with such poor operating records, should be closed at its max capacity with no exception! Other than the odor issue, the problem of groundwater contamination underneath the Newby Landfill by a carcinogenic substance is a big alert to the public health. The groundwater testing results in 2015 and in 2016 show that the groundwater contamination is speeding up: from 30 ug/L increasing to 92 ug/L, according to the water testing report from SF water board. In my opinion, and I hope you will agree with me, that protecting public health is the indisputable duty of government officials. All officials with authority to approve any project with environmental impacts should follow the CEQA guidelines and San Jose municipal codes. If Newby Landfill with 11 public nuisance tickets and the evidence of increased groundwater contamination deserves an expansion, then all other 44 closed landfills deserve to be reopened and expanded! If Newby Landfill gets an expansion approval by your votes, you will be the one opening the Pandora Box of landfills. “Given the County Health Department’s assessment of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill odors affecting the health of residents, it is unconscionable that the city should continue to dump its trash there,” Englander said in a statement. “With over 9,000 odor complaints since 2009, Republic Services has proven they are incapable of controlling odors from the site.” (LA leader moves to shut down Sunshine Canyon Landfill, By Gregory J. Wilcox, Los Angeles Daily News 11/04/16) WasteDive.com also released news that Tullytown Landfill in PA will be closed in 2 years. The landfill operators were working on mitigating odors but all failed; therefore, Pennsylvania EPA ordered the landfill to shut down. Newby Landfill is very similar to Tullytown Landfill. Both landfills sit at multi cities and towns. Both landfills are located upwind of residential areas. Both Landfills cause serious public nuisance. Both landfills have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. Now Tullytown Landfill was ordered to shut down. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! When you vote on the Newby Landfill Expansion, please take public health and CEQA guidelines into your consideration. Sincerely, Chor chia
From: Feijun (Henry) Song Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 9:47 AM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: I am a 11 year NSJ resident. You got stop Newby expansion ! milpitas garbage not going to Guadalupe landfill any more ! stop newby expansion please ! http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/30/sunnyvale-council-oks-negotiations-with-milpitas-for-use-ofsmart-station/
From: Minzhen Yang Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 11:30 AM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: Please help saving Almaden San Jose !! Hi, Rebecca, I hope this email finds you well! This is Minzhen Yang, a resident living in Almaden San Jose. As I learned that you are the members of SJ Planning Commission. The Guadalupe Landfill is too close to the residential area to have more trash coming to Guadalupe. Without expanding Newby, the trash from all the cities in Bay Area will be moved here. We will soon be in the worse situation than residents in Milpitas. Please keep the trash where it is and manipulates Republic Service to handle the odor more efficiently. Moving trash from one place to another even closer residential area is not a solution but transferring the issue to another worse choice. I appreciate your time and consideration!
-Best Regards, Minzhen ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/minzhen )
Live simply, expect little, give much, trust God. Live every day with joy, peace and gratitude !
From: Seong Son To: "
[email protected]" ; "
[email protected]" ; "
[email protected]" ; "
[email protected]" ; "
[email protected]" ; "
[email protected]" Cc: "
[email protected]" Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 9:21 AM Subject: Please Approve Newby Expansion!! -- From a very concern San Jose resident
Dear San Jose City Planning Commissioners, Please approve Newby expansion plan!! I live in Almaden Valley along with my wife and 2 children. My house is located in the Campagna complex, just off of Guadalupe Mine Road. So, I can see and experience the traffic going in and out of Guadalupe landfill everyday. I can feel the smell that comes from the landfill on some bad days. But, what worry me more are the trucks of all sized going through the only road that takes you to the landfill, Guadalupe Mine Road. I see everyday trucks barreling down the road, sometimes quite fast, with their diesel fume spewing all over the road along with the dirt they pick up along the way. The road conditions seem to degraded over the years of heavily used traffic. I see several accidents over the years caused directly and indirectly by the truck traffic. Without the Newby expansion, I worry that the problems will get worse for the neighborhood and for the whole area around the immediate neighborhood. I worry that the consequence of not expanding Newby will lead to greater landfill traffic filling our streets. And, I don’t just mean the Guadalupe Mine Road. I can imagine the traffic getting worse on Camden that leads to the smaller Guadalupe Mine. There is a small commercial area that includes 7-Eleven. I see everyday people struggling to maneuver in and out of the residential streets and these commercial lots. I saw head-on collisions that killed people. With greater traffic due to the landfill traffic, I can only imagine worse. What about those children who ride their bikes to school in the morning? I worry for their safeties. The immediate area along the Guadalupe Mine Road will definitely be worse. The newer housing built and being built create more strain on the road that we share to get from and out of our homes into the main streets of Camden and Coleman. The impact of more traffic on Camden means more impact to these immediate areas as well. The traffic, smell, pollution -- I see the impact in my head and making me feel terrible. And, the form of pollution comes in many forms. I in the month of October had 3 flats alone, just within a week period. And, that is not right for anyone. SO, PLEASE HELP US. I believe that you, the commissioners, have a very important decision to make for the residents of Almaden Valley on December 7th. By approving the expansion of Kirby landfill, you will greatly help Almaden Valley to stay a safe neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Seong Min Son (408) 693-1984 1523 Via Campo Aureo, San Jose 95120
From: Bvmilledge To: ed ; msyesney ; nick ; peterforsanjose ; ballardshiloh ; namrata_v Sent: Fri, Dec 2, 2016 8:04 am Subject: Moving the Trash from Newby to Guadalupe
To the San Jose Planning Commission: I am a resident of the Cambrian area of San Jose and want to reach out to all of you as the people who represent us in matters such as this. I live off of Camden Avenue west of Highway 85. Camden Avenue is already a heavy traffic road without the addition of the many garbage trucks that would be traveling it if trash starts coming from Milpitas to San Jose/Guadalupe. I am also concerned that the additional traffic will result in people using our residential streets which run along side of Camden Avenue, as alternative routes to avoid the additional traffic. Camden is also a residential street with many families living on it. The additional garbage trucks will be detrimental to their safely and their environment, not to mention what they will do to the roads and not just the local roads, but all the roads from Milpitas to Almaden that the will have the additional traffic from these garbage trucks. In addition to the condition of the roads, there is the additional traffic itself on already overcrowded freeways between Milpitas and San Jose. The Guadalupe Landfill is also in/close to a residential area, much more so then Newby and with older longer standing neighborhoods who will be impacted by having more trash come there. Without expanding Newby, the trash from all the cities in Bay Area could/will be moved here. We will soon be in the worse situation than residents in Milpitas. It would seem their complaint, which is basically odor, not traffic, not environmental, etc., could be handled in a more efficient way then moving all the trash to Guadalupe. I would ask that you vote to keep the trash where it is.. Moving trash from one place to another that is even closer to residential areas is not a solution but transferring the issue to another worse choice. Thank you for listening. I appreciate your time and consideration! Betty Milledge
From: Minrui Yu Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 2:58 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Cc: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Please Vote to Expand Newby Island Landfill Dear Members of San Jose Planning Commission, I am writing to urge you to approve the Newby Landfill expansion. I understand Newby Landfill has served the Bay Area for a number of years and without further expansion, it will soon reach its limit and be closed. That means all the garbage it handles will likely go to the Guadalupe Landfill. As an Almaden resident, I strongly oppose that approach, for the following reasons: 1. Unlike Newby, Guadalupe Landfill is very close to large resident area (1000ft to the closest). 2. Guadalupe Landfill is also close to Guadalupe River /Alamitos Creek, which is one of the water sources for the city of San Jose. Worse yet, it is right on the Shannon Fault and an earth quake could cause disastrous pollution. Recent Loma fire, which is not far from the landfill, indicates there's fire hazards as well. 3. Unlike Newby, which is near major highway, there's only a one-lane road leading to Guadalupe Landfill. So traffic could also be a problem. I heard the city of Milpitas has voted to move their garbage to Guadalupe, with the hope to reduce the odor problem in that area. I feel their selfish act is very regretting, not to say whether that odor comes from Newby Landfill is still a subject for debate, as suggested otherwise by the latest environmental report. I have gone to the hearing by the city of Milpitas on this subject a couple of times. Each time I was told to "go back to your own city" for the solution as their city council is very supportive to their residents' request. I would like to see our city do the same. So please, please help us to prevent any more garbage from coming to Guadalupe by voting to expand Newby. Best regards, Minrui Yu
From: Cheso, Gil Date: Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 9:12 AM Subject: FW: soil numbers To: "
[email protected]"
Good morning Michelle,
I hope this chilly morning finds you and Richard nice and toasty warm! I hate to keep bothering you about the upcoming hearing but I thought it might be important to share with you and other committee members benefits of Newby that a lot of people don’t realize. SCVWD does flood control sediment removal and the soils come to Newby in larger amounts than people might realize. Not sure where else this material would go.
See you on Wednesday
Gil
From: Fernandez, Lalania Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:14 PM To: Cheso, Gil Subject: RE: soil numbers
Hi Gil, Of course I will add for you.
Santa Clara Creek bed Sediment Removal
2011 2012
3,193.75 TN 8,614.60 TN
2013
12,409.32 TN
2014 2015
82,882.46 TN 4,295.24 TN
2016
32,123.56 TN
287 lds 888 lds 1225 lds 5681 lds 299 lds 2665 lds
From: Cheso, Gil Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 11:05 AM To: Fernandez, Lalania Subject: RE: soil numbers
Do you know how many trucks?
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message -------From: "Fernandez, Lalania" Date: 12/1/16 10:46 AM (GMT-08:00) To: "Cheso, Gil" Subject: RE: soil numbers
Hi Gil,
I have the years 2011-2016 below but haven’t received the prior years from the HelpDesk yet. I will forward as soon as they send them.
Santa Clara Creekbed Sediment Removal 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016
3,193.75 8,614.60 82,882.46 4,295.24 32,123.56
TN TN TN TN TN
From: Cheso, Gil Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 10:09 AM To: Fernandez, Lalania Subject: soil numbers
Hi Lalania,
Did you ever get a chance to get the creek cleanup totals?
Gil
From: Chia-Ling Kong Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 3:36 AM To: Ed Abelite; Nick Pham; Edesa Bit-Badal; Shiloh Ballard; Michelle Yesney; Peter Allen; Namrata Vora; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; Oliverio, Pierluigi; District7; Herrera, Rose; District9; District 10 Cc: Mike Donohoe; Cortese, Dave; Eduardo Morales; Cathy Hyde; Buzo, Fred Subject: Please Deny Newby Island Landfill Expansion Permit [PD14-014]
Honorable members of San Jose Planning Commission and City Council, I resided in North San Jose for more than 8 years prior to moving to Milpitas. I continue to commute daily through North San Jose for work and patronize many San Jose amenities in the vicinity of Newby Island Landfill. My children attend public schools about 1 mile from the landfill. Our quality of life, like many others, have been negatively affected by Newby Island operations. Newby Island is the last active municipal landfill in San Francisco Bay. More than 23,000 residents have signed "Stop Newby Island Landfill Expansion" petition. About 1.3 million voters from 9 counties in the Bay Area approved Measure AA to restore San Francisco Bay from landfill and toxic pollution. About 11,000 Milpitas voters approved Measure L and stopped sending waste to Newby Island. I urge you to consider the will of the people to stop landfill pollution and protect our environment for future generations. I respectfully request that you unequivocally deny permit PD14-014 and order a subsequent/supplemental EIR to address all substantial changes and evaluate project alternatives in accordance to San Jose Municipal Code Section 20.10.120, 20.100.940 and California Code of Regulations Section 15162-15164. Please uphold San Jose's Municipal Code to protect public health, safety and general welfare. Unprecedented expansion and impacts Over 44 San Francisco Bay landfills have been closed. Newby Island is now the last active and largest bay landfill ever built. The enormity of waste buried is irreversible and has polluted our air, water and soil for many generations. PD14-014 permit will effectuate an expansion of unprecedented magnitude in the Greater Bay Area and forever change the character of South Bay. The expansion will perpetuate and cause significant environmental impacts in an area already burdened by severe pollution with recent addition of MRF, ZWED and Zanker expansion. Excessive number of violations above EIR baseline
In the past 2 years, Newby Island site received over 30 violations from Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), CalRecycle, Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), RWQCB (Water Board) and Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department (SCEHD) for a wide range of regulatory issues including public nuisance, safety, surface leaks and more. As of today, 23 violations (BAAQMD, SCEHD) and 1 Notice to Comply (RWQCB) remain active and unresolved. This represents substantial change compared to 0 violation during EIR study period (2005-2008). No permit should be granted until violations are fully resolved and revert to baseline EIR condition. Chronic odor nuisance above CEQA and EIR threshold of significance While ERM's report is clearly inadequate due to limited 10-day sampling and failure to account for fugitive odor from surface leaks, its estimated odor impact of 2-4 months a year on 3 surrounding cities (San Jose, Milpitas and Fremont) represents a deplorable condition that must be immediately abated, not expanded. BAAQMD 22-month investigation of over 6000 odor complaints also provides evidence that current odor situation is significantly worse than EIR baseline and 2 other active municipal landfills in San Jose. These findings warrant the preparation of subsequent/supplemental EIR. Superior project alternatives The City of Milpitas and concerned residents have undertaken steps to demonstrate our resolve towards stopping Newby Island expansion. Last week, City of Sunnyvale has offered Milpitas the use and partnership in SMaRT station geared towards zero waste and send residue to Kirby Canyon Landfill located away from residential areas. This move also reduced garbage rates for all 4 cities in the partnership, proving that sending waste away from Newby Island is a socially, economically and environmentally superior alternative. New state regulations, diversion goals and excess capacity Santa Clara Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan documented 20 years of excess landfill capacity without Newby Island expansion. New regulations (AB341, AB1826) mandates diversion from landfill. Many non-disposal facilities are now available to process waste, providing superior alternative. Change in Closure Date by 16 years While the expansion project originally promised no change to 2025 closure date from 2007-2013 in all EIR documents, the operator has now changed its intent to operate beyond 2041. The increase in duration is a significant change that must be evaluated. Change in Landfill Waste Streams New addition of MRF and ZWED have drastically changed waste streams to/from Newby Island and profile of environmental impacts on surrounding communities, including the inflow of waste from outside Bay Area. Water Quality Issues from 150 acres of unlined landfill section Newby Island failed to meet federal/state regulations as 150 acres remains unlined (~60% of the site) and Notice to Comply to reduce leachate elevation to 0 MSL (issued in 2005) remains unresolved until today. Additional waste loading will worsen leachate elevation. There has been detection of many carcinogens in surface and groundwater, some of which exceeded protection standards. Change in Traffic Conditions after EIR Newby Island is located at I-880 and Dixon Landing Road/CA-237 which is now ranked as #2 worst congested traffic in the Bay Area, compared to rank #22 during EIR period. Land use incompatibility The original EIR never considered Milpitas and Fremont land uses. This is a gap that must be addressed as 3 cities share the border with Newby Island, and land use planning had been based on original landfill permit (150 feet) which anticipates 2025 closure. Businesses, homes, hotels, community centers and
even a university continue to sprout within 0.5 mile and further landfill expansion is incompatible with surrounding land uses. New schools and thousands of new homes are being built around the new BART stations in Warm Springs and Milpitas. Attached file contains supporting details. Thank You for your consideration. Sincerely,
Chia Ling Kong
www.milpitas-odor.info fb.com/MilpitasREACH
BAAQMD Data
Current Period
EIR Period
Change
Confirmed landfill odor complaints
47 in 36 months
3 in 36 months
16x EIR
Unconfirmed odor complaints
5,469 in 19 months
155 in 36 months
67x EIR
Latest month odor complaints
163
4.4
37x EIR
Open BAAQMD Violations
22 incl. 5 landfill odor, 7 surface leaks
0
Major change
Newby Island Permit Appeal (PD14-014)
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
1
An unprecedented size in San Francisco Bay History
STOP URBAN LANDFILL EXPANSION Why is Newby Island the only exception ?
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
2
Environmental Injustice ●
Project has significant environmental impacts requiring mitigation.
●
Over 23,000 signed the “Stop Newby Island Landfill expansion” petition.
●
Chronic pollution with the addition of ZWED, MRF, Zanker Expansion in past 5 years.
●
An expansion WILL worsen pollution.
●
No expansion as Zero Waste to landfill is a viable option.
Newby Island
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EnvJustice/
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
3
Policy makers have an obligation to protect public welfare San Jose Municipal Code Section 20.10.120 states that the purpose of zoning is "to promote and protect the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare" San Jose Municipal Code Section 20.100.940 states that a PD permit can only be issued if: “the environmental impacts of the project, including, but not limited to noise, vibration, dust, drainage, erosion, storm water runoff, and odor which, even if insignificant for purposes of the CEQA, will not have an unacceptable negative effect on adjacent property or properties". California Code of Regulations Sections 15162, 15163, 15164 also states that the lead agency has the right to prepare subsequent, supplement, or addendum to a certified EIR on the basis of substantial evidence. California Health and Safety Code 41700 - Nuisance “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public . . . “ MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
4
Evidence of substantial changes since 2012 EIR and PD zoning approval: 1. SWFP change of estimated closure date from 2025 to 2041 2. New state regulations, diversion goals and excess landfill capacity in county and Bay Area 3. Recurring odor violations and complaints >1000x CEQA threshold of significance and >29x over EIR period 4. Incompatible with surrounding land uses 5. Severe Traffic Congestion 6. Recurring leachate & water quality issues 7. Landfill waste stream and profile
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
5
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #1: SWFP change of estimated closure date from 2025 to 2041 (+16 years)
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
6
FACT #1
2025 final closure date was explicitly stated in all project documents from 2007-2013 2007: Notice of DEIR Preparation
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
7
FACT #2
2025 final closure date was explicitly stated in all project documents from 2007-2013 2007: Notice of DEIR Preparation 2009: Draft EIR Released
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
8
FACT #3
2025 final closure date was explicitly stated in all project documents from 2007-2013 2007: Notice of DEIR Preparation 2009: Draft EIR Released 2009: Republic Services response to DEIR
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
9
FACT #4
2025 final closure date was explicitly stated in all project documents from 2007-2013 2007: Notice of DEIR Preparation 2009: Draft EIR Released 2009: Republic Services response to DEIR 2011-2013: Newby Island Website
Expansion Website, http://newbyisland.com 2011-2013
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
10
FACT #5
2025 final closure date was explicitly stated in all project documents from 2007-2013 2007: Notice of DEIR Preparation 2009: Draft EIR Released 2009: Republic Services response to DEIR 2011-2013: Newby Island Website 2012: Final EIR
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
11
FACT #6
After 7 years promising there would be no change to 2025 final closure date, Republic Services applied and was approved for SWFP in 2014, changing closure date by +16 years to 2041. Divergence from project warrants subsequent EIR to be prepared.
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
12
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #2: New state regulations, new diversion goals and excess landfill capacity in Santa Clara County and Bay Area
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
13
EIR and Staff Report failed to reflect current conditions Infrastructure Policy IN – 5.15: Expand the capacity of existing landfill sites as the preferred method for increasing the City’s landfill capacity and monitor the continued availability of recycling, resource recovery and composting capacity to ensure adequate long term capacity. Analysis: NISL is a regional solid waste disposal facility that provides the collection and disposal of solid waste for San José residents and businesses. Rather than establish a new landfill site, which would be contrary to the General Plan’s solid waste policies, the proposed project conforms to the General Plan’s preferred method of allowing continued availability and promotion of recycling, resource recovery, and composting capacity to ensure adequate long-term landfill capacity.
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
14
FACT #1: Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan documented unwarranted Newby Island landfill expansion REFERENCE: Santa Clara County 4th Five-Year Review of the CIWMP (6/22/16) Commission is represented by 15 cities and the county unincorporated area: ●
The population growth in the County has been mitigated with the addition of numerous nondisposal facilities.
●
The development, implementation and adoption of diversion programs (in addition to zero waste goals, AB341 and AB1826 both prompt jurisdictions to divert material from commercial activities) previously and the established by all jurisdictions help extend landfill capacity and will continue to do so as these programs and outreach, help the community understand and buy into the zero waste concept and alternatives to landfilling waste.
●
Newby Island Landfill currently accepts about 60% of the County’s waste and has listed 5-7 years site life is currently undergoing a permit process for expansion. If the expansion goes through, then the site life will be extended to 20-25 years. If the expansion is denied, the calculation estimates splitting the material among the remaining two landfills within the County. The volume of material to each site would almost double their current volume which would decrease the site life by half. This reduction would be estimated at 20 some years which is greater than the 15 years for a Siting Element revision.
EIR must reflect substantial changes in waste diversion laws and excess capacity MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
15
FACT #2:
Excess landfill capacity in Santa Clara County
There is no shortage of landfill capacity. Newby Island landfill expansion is unwarranted.
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate project alternatives MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
16
FACT #3:
Excess landfill capacity in Bay Area
There is no shortage of landfill capacity. Newby Island landfill expansion is unwarranted.
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/FacIT/Facility/Charts/DisposalGap/bregDispLife.pdf
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate project alternatives MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
17
Countywide Nondisposal Facility Element Additions after EIR study period 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Lam Hauling, Inc. Leo Recycle (Sixteenth Amendment 2016 - added) ECO Box Recycling, Inc. (Fifteenth Amendment 06/14 - added) Mission Trail Food Materials Transfer/Processing Operations (Fourteenth Amendment 03/14 - added) Valley Recycling San Jose CDI Processing/Transfer Facility (Thirteen Amendment 01/14 added) Wood Processing Facility at Recology Pacheco Pass (Twelfth Amendment 08/11 - added) Smurfit-Stone Recycling San Jose Facility (Ninth Amendment 3/11 - added) Environmental Resource Recovery, Inc., (Valley Recycling) (Ninth Amendment 3/11 added) Green Earth Management LLC Kings Row Recycling Facility (Ninth Amendment 3/11 added) Zero Waste Energy Development Company Anaerobic Digestion Facility (Ninth Amendment 3/11 - added) Recology Silicon Valley Processing and Transfer Facility (Ninth Amendment 3/11 - added) GreenWaste Material Facility and Transfer Station (Eighth Amendment 2/10 - added) GreenTeam of San Jose Material Recovery Facility and Transfer Station (Eighth Amendment 2/10 - added)
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
18
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #3: Recurring public nuisance violations and odor complaints trending >1000x CEQA threshold of significance and >29x over EIR period
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
19
San Jose Planning Staff report conclusion is fundamentally flawed “The ERM study indicates that landfill odors may be detectible on average a little more than one day per month (0.4% per year). The BAAQMD complaint history over the recent 19 month period from December 2014 to June 2016 indicates that there were five days during that period where BAAQMD issued odor-related Notices of Violation to the operator. There is no information about current conditions at the landfill that indicate that there have been any significant changes rendering the baseline for environmental clearance inaccurate or otherwise requiring further environmental review. Nor is there any indication of significant odor impact.” ● ●
Staff failed to provide quantifiable threshold used to define significance. Current conditions should be compared against EIR baseline and other operating landfills within San Jose’s jurisdiction. MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
20
Evidence of significant odor impacts Item
Current
EIR Period
Change
Confirmed landfill odor complaints
47 in 36 months
3 in 36 months
16x EIR
Unconfirmed odor complaints
5,469 in 19 months
155 in 36 months
67x EIR
Latest month odor complaints
163
4.4
37x EIR
Open Violations
22 incl. 5 landfill odor, 7 surface leaks
0
Major change
● ● ● ●
ERM study omitted impact from surface leaks ERM’s estimated odor impact of 2-4 months a year on 3 surrounding cities is a deplorable condition that requires immediate solution MRF expansion in 2012 has aggravated odor problem Ineffective landfill odor mitigation
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate project alternatives MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
21
Evidence of extreme public nuisance
●
Total complaints and violations at Newby Island is excessively high in the region
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate project alternatives MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
22
2012 Certified EIR - ”According to BAAQMD records, in the past three years (September 30, 2005 through September 30, 2008) there have been 155 unconfirmed odor complaints and three confirmed odor complains about the landfill.” FACT #2: FACT #1: 65% of 9 counties total is not infrequent Staff Report - “Greater Milpitas area from December 2014 through March 2016, accounting for approximately 65 percent of the 7,394 total odor complaints received by the BAAQMD from its nine-county jurisdiction”
Newby Island accounts for 94% of confirmed odor, 15X more Sewage Plant + ZWED
unconfirmed % is consistent with BAAQMD rigorous process
FACT #3:
46 confirmed landfill odor complaints = 29X EIR Baseline
FACT #4: 5,469 unconfirmed odor complaints = 67X EIR Baseline
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
23
FACT #5: Odor trend ●
Despite improvement from peak, latest month had ~263 complaints or 37x EIR period
●
No expansion permit should be granted unless odor reverts to EIR baseline. This also proved the EIR is clearly stale and a subsequent EIR should be prepared.
FACT #6: ERM inadequacy
ERM study based on 2 short sample period (5 days in October + 5 days in December) is inadequate to fully profile odor exposure.
EIR
period = 4.4
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
24
FACT #7: Landfill Odor Frequency ●
There are 47 confirmed landfill complaints over 20 days, or 3% of the year, 7.5X higher than ERM’s prediction.
●
BAAQMD data must be given heavier emphasis as it covers 22 months investigation, compared to ERM study based on 10-day sampling.
●
Confirmed complaints represents only a small fraction of total infractions.
EIR
period =
0.03
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
25
FACT #8: Violations “BAAQMD considers these NOVs unresolved and enforcement confidential. Therefore these NOVs could be sustained or dismissed.”
Odor Nuisance
●
It is against SJ Municipal code to permit any project that is a public nuisance
●
It is irresponsible to make permit decisions with unresolved public nuisance violations
●
13 landfill violations in 17 months is a substantial change from 0 violation during the EIR study period.
Surface leaks
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
26
FACT #9: LEAKS ●
ERM study did not consider landfill surface leaks, which is the most common recurring violation.
●
Card-Schmidt odor study has shown concentration of 6,800 DT from landfill surface leaks.
●
If the operator cannot manage leaks in existing operations, the risk of an expansion would likely be detrimental.
●
2-4 months odor impact on surrounding cities is a significant problem.
SEVERE ODOR IMPACTS ON 3 CITIES MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
27
FACT #10: MRF expansion in 2012 has aggravated odor problem ●
Accounts for 75% of confirmed complaints on 113 days and 7 violations in the past 17 months.
●
ERM Study projected 47 odorous days per year from the recyclery.
●
No expansion should ever be permitted in this area given the dire situation.
August 9, 2012
“The plant replaces a smaller recycling operation on the same site. It is the result of the San Jose City Council’s decision last year to award a 15-year contract to Republic to collect and process all of the trash and recycled materials from every business in San Jose.” MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
28
FACT #11: Ineffective landfill odor mitigation
Expansion Started
4 months only
● ● ●
$27 million mitigation measures 2 Orders of Abatement to modify permit Class action lawsuit
Dr. Cyrus Rangan, Director, Bureau of Toxicology and Environmental Assessment, County of Los Angeles, Public Health: “The World Health Organization, and the CDC have been coming out recently with statements saying that things like odors and other things of that scale that affect people’s daily quality of life or daily living are considered Public Health issues". MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
29
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #4: Existing and planned surrounding land uses
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
30
Incompatible Surrounding Land Uses Infrastructure Policy IN – 5.9: Locate and operate solid waste disposal facilities in a manner which protects environmental resources and is compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Analysis: An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project results in significant environmental impacts. However, mitigation measures are incorporated to avoid and/or reduce these impacts. The proposed project would not conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The proposed project will not significantly change primary land uses and activities existing at the site and, therefore, will not have a major impact to current and future land uses.
Staff failed to consider Fremont and Milpitas land uses which directly borders the project MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
31
Fremont & Milpitas Land Use
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
32
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #5: Severe Traffic Congestion
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
33
Staff failed to recognize change in traffic conditions Infrastructure Policy IN – 5.10: Plan, maintain and operate MRF and landfill facilities in a manner that mitigates potential negative environmental and land use impacts, including surface water or ground water contamination; issues related to birds, insects, rodents or other wildlife; increased traffic and traffic hazards; noise and odor problems; pollution and potential littering of traffic routes; and windborne and waterborne litter. Analysis: The approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program includes mitigation for impacts to wildlife, including pre-activity surveys and the implementation of a Nuisance Species Abatement Plan, discussed further below. No impacts to traffic, noise, odor, pollution, or litter were identified.
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
34
Congestion Ranking I-880 to CA-237 & Dixon Landing Road is now in the top 10 most congested locations in Bay Area EIR Baseline: 2008: Rank #22 Current condition: 2013: Rank #2 2014: Rank #2 We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
35
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #6: Leachate & Water Quality Issues
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
36
2016 report showing leachate mound and 150 acres unlined sections
LEACHATE MOUND VIOLATION
Expansion permit allowing landfill operation on unlined sections
●
On-going corrective action since 2005-present ○ Federal & CA regulations: leachate < 0 MSL ○ 2016 Report: leachate mound at 38 ft MSL ○ 2014 Report: ■ Mound due to past waste loading in unlined sections ■ “an additional upward gradient is likely to be reestablished when additional waste is placed in this area.“ ○ In 6/21/2016 LEA report: “MSW waste is being placed on the north unlined portion of the landfill.”
●
2012 certified EIR is based on 2008 report ○ Expansion permit = 296 acres for landfill ■ 150 acres unlined ■ 52 acres insufficiently lined ○ It is reckless to expand on unlined area with known violation
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
37
RECURRING GROUND/SURFACE WATER CONTAMINATION RWQCB reports show recurring exceedance of water quality protection standards every year since 2012 Certified EIR: ● ●
● ● ●
2016: Chlorofom and styrene 2015: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), carbon disulfide, bromodichloromethane and chloroform 2014: acetone, carbon disulfide, toluene, acetone, MEK and TKN 2013: styrene, toluene, carbon disulfide 2012: Ammonia, chemical oxygen demand (COD) and TKN
Chloroform, styrene and bromodichloromethane are carcinogens We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
38
1,4-DIOXANE IN GROUNDWATER EXCEEDS DRINKING WATER NOTIFICATION LEVEL (1 PPB) ●
1,4 dioxane has not been detected above the Notification Level in public drinking water supply wells in Santa Clara County or any other Bay Area county
●
BUT, groundwater testing shows: ○ Zanker Road Landfill reports up to 93 ppb ○ Newby Island Landfill reports up to 92 ppb ○ Current screening level is 50,000 ppb for estuarine protection only
●
Tighter consideration must be given to protect all potential sources of drinking water
Newby Island Landfill Waste Discharge Requirements: “Some groundwater underlying and adjacent to the site qualifies as a potential source of drinking water, although there is no current use of the site's groundwater, nor any anticipated plans for its use.”
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
39
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE #7: Landfill Waste Streams and Profile
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
40
ADDITION OF MRF AND ZWED DRASTICALLY CHANGED WASTE STREAMS TO NEWBY ISLAND LANDFILL AFTER EIR STUDY ERM Report called out waste from ZWED to landfill has the most offensive odor
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
41
NEWBY ISLAND EXPANDING WASTE INFLOWS FROM OUTSIDE SANTA CLARA COUNTY After EIR study period, waste inflows to Newby Island have been drastically expanded, from as far as Fresno County, more than 600 miles round trip
We demand subsequent EIR to be prepared under CEQA to reevaluate impacts and project alternatives
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
42
42
“Milpitas REACH”
It is irresponsible and against state and municipal code to permit Newby Island expansion, a public nuisance with 20 open violations, when alternatives exist.
DENY PERMIT TODAY We demand a subsequent EIR to protect public welfare MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
43
Backup Only
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
44
MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
45
H2S Odor Reference from CDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=387&tid=67 “Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a flammable, colorless gas that smells like rotten eggs. People usually can smell hydrogen sulfide at low concentrations in air, ranging from 0.0005 to 0.3 parts per million (ppm) (0.0005-0.3 parts of hydrogen sulfide in 1 million parts of air).” “Hydrogen sulfide air concentrations from natural sources range between 0.00011 and 0.00033 ppm.” “No health effects have been found in humans exposed to typical environmental concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (0.00011-0.00033 parts per million [ppm]).” “Exposure to low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide may cause irritation to the eyes, nose, or throat. It may also cause difficulty in breathing for some asthmatics.”
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
BAAQMD measured 1-6 ppb H2S in our community 12-18X higher than natural air. It is above the detectable range of 0.5 ppb (or 0.0005 ppm) Scientific evidence that residents are experiencing odorous air MILPITAS-ODOR.INFO
46
From: Steve Miller Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2016 3:24 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Subject: Objection To New trash to Guadalupe Land Fill
I hope this email find you all well. I'm a resident of Almaden and have lived here for about 2 years. I understand that you are members of the San Jose Planning Commission directly or indirectly involving the Newby landfill's current and future planning, including its possible expansion. My family and I are seeking your support to expand the Newby landfill and implement proper measures to prevent bay area trash from overflowing into the Guadalupe landfill, which is located in heavily populated communities at Almaden. We made this request not only for addressing our street safety problems caused by hauling trucks and heavy traffic in communities around the Guadalupe landfill, but also for ensuring all plans by you from this point and on will reflect urban development of Almaden neighborhoods. Your support on this matter will help to ensure that our future generation has a healthy and safe living environment. We thank you for your immediate attention on this matter. Best Regards, Steve Miller 1802 Mulberry Creek San Jose, CA 95120
From: Jeff Gordon Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2016 6:15 AM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9; District 10;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Sam Delson;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Lauren Zeise;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Subject: Please vote AGAINST the Newby Island Expansion Dear Public Official, This is Jeff Gordon. Along with 18,000 online and 5000 paper petition signers asking for No on Newby Landfill Expansion Approval. I am writing this letter to urge you to reject the Newby Landfill expansion application at the scheduled December 7th planning committee meeting. Newby Landfill got 11 public nuisance tickets, 6 odor NOVs from gas leaking, MRF, and compost in 17 months; an average of once a month (Note: these numbers are from the latest Odor Study Report)! The environmental impact is very significant! According to the CEQA guidelines, no new project with a significant environmental impact can be approved. The research found that 44 landfills in the SF bay were closed when reaching their max capacity. Newby Landfill, with such poor operating records, should be closed at its max capacity with no exception! Other than the odor issue, the problem of groundwater contamination underneath the Newby Landfill by a carcinogenic substance is a big alert to the public health. The groundwater testing results in 2015 and in 2016 show that the groundwater contamination is speeding up: from 30 ug/L increasing to 92 ug/L, according to the water testing report from SF water board. In my opinion, and I hope you will agree with me, that protecting public health is the indisputable duty of government officials. All officials with authority to approve any project with environmental impacts should follow the CEQA guidelines and San Jose municipal codes. If Newby Landfill with 11 public nuisance tickets and the evidence of increased groundwater contamination deserves an expansion, then all other 44 closed landfills deserve to be reopened and expanded! If Newby Landfill gets an expansion approval by your votes, you will be the one opening the Pandora Box of landfills. “Given the County Health Department’s assessment of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill odors affecting the health of residents, it is unconscionable that the city should continue to dump its trash there,” Englander said in a statement. “With over 9,000 odor complaints since 2009, Republic Services has proven they are incapable of controlling odors from the site.” (LA leader moves to shut down Sunshine Canyon Landfill, By Gregory J. Wilcox, Los Angeles Daily News 11/04/16) WasteDive.com also released news that Tullytown Landfill in PA will be closed in 2 years. The landfill operators were working on mitigating odors but all failed; therefore Pennsylvania EPA ordered the landfill to shut down. Newby Landfill is very similar to Tullytown Landfill. Both landfills are located close to multiple cities and towns. Both landfills are located upwind of residential areas. Both Landfills cause serious public nuisance. Both landfills have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. Now Tullytown Landfill was ordered to shut down. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! When you vote on the Newby Landfill Expansion, please take public health and CEQA guidelines into your consideration. Sincerely,
-Jeff Gordon
Mobile: 408-365-1500
[email protected]
From: Feijun (Henry) Song Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2016 6:54 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected]; Michelle Yesney;
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9; District 10;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Sam Delson;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Lauren Zeise;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Subject: I am 11 years NSJ resident, enough is enough !
You got stop Newby expansion ! milpitas garbage not going to Guadalupe landfill any more ! stop newby expansion please ! http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/30/sunnyvale-council-oks-negotiations-with-milpitas-for-use-ofsmart-station/
From: Jennifer Strohfus Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 6:13 PM Subject: Please don't grant expansion permit to Newby Landfill, a public nuisance! To:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], District10 San Jose ,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], Sam Delson ,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], Lauren Zeise , "
[email protected]" ,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], Nick Pham ,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], "Bustos, Rebecca" ,
[email protected]
Dear San Jose Mayor, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members, Please Don't Grant Expansion permit to Newby Landfill! The follows are the whys. You may not know that LA officials ordered the shut-down of Sunshine Canyon Landfill this year after receiving 9,000 odor complaints since 2009. You may not realize that Newby Landfill has received over 5000 odor complaints in two years, 11 public nuisance tickets, and 22 notice of violations in 17 months. Meanwhile, the groundwater beneath the Newby Landfill has been contaminated. The groundwater testing results from SF water board show 29 ug/l in 2015 and 92 ug/l in 2016 of 1,4 dioxane. With the data and facts above, the staff of San Jose Planning committee concludes that Newby Landfill expansion is in accordance with CEQA and recommends you, planning committee commissioners, to approve the Newby Landfill expansion permit! The staff’s conclusion was based on the old EIR from year 2008. Apparently the old EIR is too old to reflect the true conditions of Newby Landfill in 2016. The EIR produced in 2008 has no data of odor complaints and groundwater testing results at that time. Therefore, the staff’s conclusion is completely wrong from using the EIR in 2008!!! It would only show the public that you’re very foolish if you believe that the Newby landfill with 11 public nuisance tickets in 17 months and groundwater contamination increasing from 29 ug/l
to 92 ug/l in a year is qualified to expand and is abiding by CEQA or San Jose municipal codes!!! The staff’s recommendation was based on an odor study report that came from the analysis of 2 weeks of data. Let me quote Jack Broadbent’s opinion on the newly finished odor study report. He is the Executive Officer/Air Pollution Control Officer from the BAAQMD. He said: “overall, based on the data used to run the models, the Air District is not confident that this report reflects, to the best extent possible, what is occurring and what has been observed at Newby Island Resource Recovery Park and in the neighboring community over the last year and more. The Air District continues to receive daily complaints regarding both garbage and compost odors emanating from the facility and our inspectors are able to detect these odors”. To verify the legitimacy of the quote, you can call Eric Stevenson, 415-749-4695 or email
[email protected] “Given the County Health Department’s assessment of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill odors affecting the health of residents, it is unconscionable that the city should continue to dump its trash there,” Englander said in a statement. “With over 9,000 odor complaints since 2009, Republic Services has proven they are incapable of controlling odors from the site.” (LA leader moves to shut down Sunshine Canyon Landfill, http://www.dailynews.com/environment-and-nature/20161104/la-leadermoves-to-shut-down-sunshine-canyonlandfill%23author1&source=gmail&ust=1479848524998000&usg=AFQjCNGp wD-jgyhztgioYG8SBuPeawOn8A">Gregory J. Wilcox, Los Angeles Daily News 11/04/16). LA leaders recognize the health impact from the odor emanating from landfill. I believe San Jose officials have the same ability. WasteDive.com also released news that Tullytown Landfill in PA will be closed in 2 years. The landfill operators were working on mitigating odors but failed; therefore the Pennsylvania EPA ordered the landfill to be shut down. Newby Landfill is very similar to Tullytown Landfill. Both landfills border multiple cities. Both landfills are located upwind of residential areas. Both landfills cause serious public nuisance. Both landfills have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. Now Tullytown Landfill was ordered to shut down. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! Since March 2016, Almaden residents are strongly opposing the city of Milpitas to contract with Waste Management that will lead the city garbage to be shipped to Guadalupe landfill instead of Newby Landfill. The rumor is that if Newby Landfill doesn’t get expanded, all cities’ garbage will dump into Guadalupe Landfill. Another rumor is that the farther the landfill is located,
the higher the garbage bill will be. The truth is that except for Guadalupe landfill, there is another alternative for Milpitas’ garbage to go, which is Kirby Canyon Landfill. Now Milpitas garbage most likely will be dumped into Kirby Canyon Landfill. Even though Kirby Canyon Landfill is farther than Guadalupe, Milpitas’ garbage bill is expecting to be lower. Another example of reputing the theory of the farther the landfill s located, the higher the garbage bill will be is monthly garbage fee of the city of Colma, San Mateo County, next to Daly City. The city’s garbage has dumped to Newby landfill since this summer. Colma’s garbage bill is $19 per month compared to Milpitas’ garbage bill of $34 per month. All evidence says that shutting down Newby Landfill doesn’t mean that the garbage rates of the cities using Newby Landfill will soar or increase. Please vote NO to Newby Landfill expansion. Voting NO will be a big leap towards the goal of Zero Waste, will be a good example of abiding by CEQA guidelines, will show the big guy of San Jose is not bullying its little guys of surrounding cities, and will make the city of San Jose a really good neighbor of Milpitas, Fremont, Santa Clara, and Newark! This project of expanding Newby Landfill not only violates the CEQA guidelines but also the San Jose municipal codes. Please do not be fooled by the staff’s recommendation! It is time for Newby Landfill to retire! All neighbor cities of Newby Landfill do not appreciate the landfill's stay in the middle of Silicon Valley! Appreciate Your Time and Vote of NO to Newby expansion! Jennifer Strohfus Milpitas Resident
From: Susan Cha Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2016 5:43 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: 12/7/ hearing
Dear Ms. Bustos, I am one of the new homeowners of the houses that were built in 2014-2015 by Guadalupe Mines Road, and I bought this house with the understanding that the Guadalupe Landfill was a recycling site only. I'm horrified to think that this landfill will become a dump for all kinds of garbage from Milpitas and possibly other parts of the county eventually. I understand that there is a SJ Planning Commission meeting on 12/7. Please do not send more trash to Guadalupe Landfill as it is too close to where we walk, play, and go to school/work. Please make the decision to expand Newby Island Landfill.
Thank you! Best,
Susan Cha
From: JC Wang Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2016 1:44 AM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Cc: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Request for expanding Newby landfill Dear All, I hope this email find you all well. I'm a resident of Almaden and have lived here for about 20 years. I understand that you are members of the San Jose Planning Commission directly or indirectly involving the Newby landfill's current and future planning, including its possible expansion. My family and I are seeking your support to expand the Newby landfill and implement proper measures to prevent bay area trash from overflowing into the Guadalupe landfill, which is located in heavily populated communities at Almaden. We made this request not only for addressing our street safety problems caused by hauling trucks and heavy traffic in communities around the Guadalupe landfill, but also for ensuring all plans by you from this point and on will reflect urban development of Almaden neighborhoods. Your support on this matter will help to ensure that our future generation has a healthy and safe living environment. We thank you for your immediate attention on this matter. Chih-Hsin Wang, Ph.D. 7115 Wooded Lake Dr. San Jose, CA 95120
From: Jennychenw Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 10:39 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Cc:
[email protected] Subject: Save San Jose, Save Almaden Dear sir/Madam, As we all know, Almaden Valley is an upper middle-class, one of best neighborhoods in San Jose. Guadalupe landfill is the closest landfill to residences in the whole Bay Area, next to Almaden Valley. No one wants to live next to landfill, smell Oder every day. One mistake in decision can make enormous negative consequences. Compare with Sunnyvale, Mountain View, Cupertino, Saratoga, even Milpitas, do our Planning Commissioners really not care about San Jose becoming the worst environment city？ Hope we can keep Almaden Valley a great environment. For long term value, it will benefit the entire San Jose, please be very careful to make decision for San Jose and our next generation.... Stop Trash at Guadalupe Landfill, Save San Jose, Save Almaden! Best regards, Jenny Sent from my iPhone
From: Kim Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 9:03 PM To:
[email protected] Cc: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: No Trash in Almaden Hi San Jose Planning commissioner, Google map clearly shows me what strong message I can deliver to you. Please spend your time and take a look at a map around San Jose. Guadalupe landfill is my neighbor's backyard. There are almost 10000 homes within 2 miles from there. Dumping trashes in this area is just ridiculous. We are making things even worse. We all have to work together smartly and find out other alternative options. Almaden cannot be an option at all compared to all other landfills around. Please help,, No Almaden! Thanks, Sangsun Kim
From: Roshni Desai Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 8:54 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: Newby Landfill To whom this concerns, I am currently a resident on Guadalupe Mines near the entrance of the Guadalupe landfill on Guadalupe Mines Rd and Sycamore creek. The landfill is too close to residential areas. There are neighborhoods and houses at the entrance of this landfill. These neighborhoods are directly impacted by all of the increasing traffic, trucks, sea gulls due to the landfill. I have visited Newby Landfill, it is not near residential property. Houses and neighborhoods are not directly impacted by the traffic of the trucks. This is not a solution. Pioneer highschool, where the future generation is learning is covered by seagulls every single day. This is directly impacting all those that live in the Almaden, Los Gatos, San Jose areas. The roads leading to Guadalupe Landfill were not built for commercial use. There is only one small residential road leading to the entrance. What if something happens to one of the trucks or at the landfill. It would be a disaster. Think before you make the next steps, think carefully for all the millions of residents that would be impacted in the San Jose/Los Gatos/Almaden area. Thank you, Roshni Desai Sent from my iPhone
From:
[email protected] Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 2:16 PM To: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Subject: Please Help To Save Almaden and Expand Newby Landfill ! Dear SJ Planning Commission and city counselor, First of all, Thank you for spending time in reading through this email, I hope this email also find you well. I'm a resident of Almaden Valley, and have been following closely with recent development on the Milpitas trash dump to Gaudalupe Landfill issue that we are all very concerned with. I understand that you are members of the San Jose Planning Commission directly or indirectly involving the Newby Landfill's current and future planning, including its possible expansion. We are actively seeking your support to expand the Newby landfill and implement proper measures to prevent bay area trash from overflowing into the Guadalupe Landfill, which is located in heavily populated communities and dense schools surroundings at Almaden. We made this request not only for addressing our street safety problems caused by hauling trucks and heavy traffic in communities around the Guadalupe landfill, but also for ensuring all plans by you from this point and on will reflect urban development of Almaden neighborhoods. Your support on this matter will help to ensure that our future generation has a healthy and safe living environment, and make San Jose a better place to live. We thank you for your immediate attention on this matter. Thank you ! Helena
From: Keng Hian Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 4:20 PM To: Ed Abelite; Nick Pham; Edesa Bit-Badal; Shiloh Ballard; Michelle Yesney; Peter Allen; Namrata Vora; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; Buzo, Fred; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; Oliverio, Pierluigi; District7; Herrera, Rose; District9; District 10; Cathy Hyde; Eduardo Morales; Cortese, Dave; Mike Donohoe . Subject: Planning Commission Agenda - 12/7/2016 - 4a
Dear Honorable electees and appointees, RE: APPEAL of the Planning Director’s decision to approve a Planned Development Permit to effectuate the Planned Development Zoning District (File No. PDC07-071) I strongly oppose the approval on granting the permit to Republic Services to extend the life of the Newby Island landfill. I can attest that what every the reports CEQA, EIR, or testing being done, nothing beats a human experience living less than 1 mile from the landfill. It is not a very good experience. Growing a landfill in an urban setting is never a right move or socially responsible as it impacts the surrounding environment, livelihood, and the wild life negatively. As this age and technology, we should be thinking on "zero waste" and not expanding landfill. Currently the bay area and surrounding regions have surplus of landfill capacity, and if this landfill is already at it's full capacity, there is more reason to shut it down and not expanding it. The only beneficiary of the expansion is the operating company, Republic Services. If you have time, please watch this movie "Before the Flood" a National Geography Production. https://youtu.be/90CkXVF-Q8M
Garbage is a major contributor to global warming. Solid waste landfills are the single largest man-made source of methane gas in the United States. Methane (CH4) is a powerful greenhouse gas that is 23 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than the most prevalent greenhouse gas—carbon dioxide (CO2). Source: http://yournec.org/content/landfills-contribute-global-warming Last thing our planet needs is a landfill expansion. We need to adhere to zero waste strategies. As a developed country, we need to set example to all developing world. Please do what is right for the current residents, the surrounding cities and for the future of our children. Please do not allow the approval of expanding the landfill. Best Regards Keng (ex-resident of North San Jose, current resident of Milpitas)
From: Ailee Ho Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 8:27 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District9 Subject: Please deny Newby landfill expansion To whom it may concern: Newby landfill expansion should be denied before comprehensive EIR and water testing is conducted. Please save Santa Clara water and environment. Please make your decision responsibly. Best regards, Ailee Ho Resident of San Jose Sent from my iPhone
From: Jyoti Prakash Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 9:16 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Buzo, Fred; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District4 Subject: We don't Need Newby Island Land Fill Expansion Dear Sir/Mam, Newby Island has been continuously expanded since the 1930s and is now the last and largest landfill ever built in San Francisco Bay. In the past 2 years, it received over 6,000 odor complaints and 30 regulatory violations issued by 5 regulatory agencies for safety, health and nuisance issues, many of the violations remain unresolved. There is excess capacity in many other non urban landfills like Kirby Island ..etc and hence there is absolutely no need to build the Garbage Skyscrapper. Thanks, Jyoti More US Citizen and Family of 4 650 504 7870
From: Peide Zhong Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 9:54 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9; District 10;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Sam Delson;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Lauren Zeise;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Subject: Please DENY Newby Landfill EXpansion Permit Dear San Jose City Council Members and Planning Committee members, My kids and my family are suffering odors from Newby Landfill. We need clean air. Newby got thousands of complaint phone calls and was issued at least 11 public nuisance tickets. Newby polluted the air and underground water. There's no reason for it to get the permit. Please be a man caring about the basic human right to breathe fresh air for people suffering from Newby ODOR. Please deny Newby's request for expansion. You're the saver of people in San Jose, Milpitas and Fremont who suffer the odor issue. We all thank you. Best regards, Zhixin Sent from my iPad
From: Nika Chen Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 9:25 AM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected]; Michelle Yesney;
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District9 Subject: Violation issued to Newby by SC health department. Please DENY Newby Island Landfill expansion request Hi Planning Commissioners and City Officials and Staff members, Please deny Newby Island Landfill expansion request. I've just found out one major issue from the report by SF regional water board. In particular, it cited that a violation has been issued to Newby by Santa Clara County Health Department in April 2016. I'm attaching that report along with this email. Some issues were addressed by Republic Services at Newby in July 2016; however, there are still several unresolved issues with potential used oil leakage into the bay, especially the 120 gallon gear oil, 185 gallon motor oil, 185 gallon transmission oil, 170 & 185 gallon hydraulic oil tanks were reported as double walls but they were actually not. This is very dangerous and disastrous to our environment if any leakage happened. Republic Services is not an environmentally responsible landfill operator and should be denied of their expansion request before a comprehensive EIT, water and health study is done at Newby. Your decision can affect million's people's health. Please make it responsibly. Thanks for time and consideration. Nika Chen
From: My Hoang Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 11:53 AM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: Please Help to stop Newby Landfill pollute the area!
Dear San Jose City Councilmembers: Please make just decision to help us, people living and working around Newby Landfill. Forty four landfills around SF bay have been closed at max capacity. Newby Landfill in the center of Silicon Valley. San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge next to it, National Wildlife Refuge next it, Companies, Business, Housing areas around it. Look at the people around it (998537 San Jose residents, 120245 Santa Clara residents, 69783 of Milpitas Residents, 224922 Fremont Residents, as total about 1.5 million people live around it). As year 2013 population record. Newby Landfill is a public nuisance, a environmental polluter, it has been affected people badly in everyday life. The contract should not be expanded. My Hoang.
From:
[email protected] on behalf of Sara Olsen Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 11:55 AM To: Ed Abelite; Nick Pham; Edesa Bit-Badal; Shiloh Ballard; Michelle Yesney; Peter Allen; Namrata Vora; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; Buzo, Fred; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; Oliverio, Pierluigi; District7; Herrera, Rose; District9; District 10; Cathy Hyde; Eduardo Morales; Cortese, Dave; Mike Donohoe Cc: Jose Esteves Subject: SVT Group: Please do not approve Newby expansion Dear Sirs and Madams, SVT Group management has been notified that the City of San Jose Planning Commission will be deciding this week on effectuating an unprecedented expansion of the Newby Island Landfill. This landfill is located less than 3 miles away from our business. The odor from this area has negatively affected our ability to conduct our business by creating an unhealthy environment for our employees and their families, contractors and clients. Expansion to a height of 245 ft would make the situation far worse. Just yesterday (12/5) the stench was extremely strong, which I noticed both at our place of business and at my preschooler's school on Dixon Road before I came to work, and I filed a complaint. The inspector investigated and reported back to me that he confirmed that the stench was due to Newby's personnel moving garbage in a zone that is outside of the permitted area for moving garbage. Given Newby's history of odor violations, this kind of violation will only increase with the massive new volume from an expansion. SVT has been alarmed to learn that the planning commission's review of Newby’s expansion has been based on an outdated EIR (2005-2008 study period) which identified many significant environmental impacts and proposed to rely on unproven mitigation measures assuming that Newby would be closed by the year 2025. That EIR also omits consideration of stakeholder impacts, i.e., the people at the
businesses and residential areas downwind. This EIR does not conform to international principles of social value analysis espoused by Social Value International. SVT Group selected
Milpitas to do business in anticipation of the 2025 closure date of Newby Island, if not an accelerated closure date in light of more than 30 recurring violations issued by 5 regulatory agencies and the excessive number of confirmed odor complaints in the past 2 years. It is imperative that no expansion permit be given, and certainly not until supplemental EIR is prepared in accordance with San Jose and California guidelines as well as international standards for social value analysis. We have also been informed that the Santa Clara Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan has reported to the state agency that there is over 20 years of excess landfill capacity due to waste diversion programs without requiring any expansion of the Newby Island landfill. Additionally, the City of Sunnyvale has offered the City of Milpitas partnership in its SMaRT station and will now send the remaining waste to Kirby Canyon Landfill, which is located away from residential areas. With these superior alternatives available, it is sensible to retire Newby Island landfill by 2025 as planned if not sooner. We believe that adhering to the 2025 closure date would agree with San Jose's zero waste initiative. It would also be consistent with the planning and development of the surrounding area.
A landfill should not be upwind of hundreds of thousands of people. Please sunset this blight
of Silicon Valley. Sincerely,
Sara Olsen
SVT Group: your Outsourced Chief Impact Officer cell: +1-510-368-7272 skype: sara_olsen
Join our mailing list!
in the heart
From: sun xiao Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 12:44 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: result will be remembered, please help Stop the Newby Expansion
We are disappointed that the San Jose Planning Committee's recommend for approval, it leave long term scare in our society, every time the smell come out, the name who approved it will refresh in our mind, our vote will go people who save our life quality instead of follow corp money. Please help us to defeat it. Eric
From: Huanhui zhao Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 2:35 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9; District 10 Subject: RE: Newby landfill
Please, please, please close the Newby landfill, if not, please please please STOP the expansion. Students at Warm Springs Elementary and Horners can smell it more frequently than ever. Bets Huanhui Zhao
From: Susan Zou Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 4:12 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9; District 10 Subject: Big NO to Newby island expansion No, no,no... + 1000000000000000000 Fremont resident: yinghong Zou & family 43788 paso nuez CMN , Fremont ca94539 Sent from my iPhone
From: Margie Hinman Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 8:12 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected] Cc: Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: Guadalupe Landfill Dear Planning Commissioners,
As you are aware, a hearing and vote will be taking place on December 7th with regard to the recent Waste Management (WM) contract to transport Milpitas's solid waste to Guadalupe landfill instead of Newby landfill where it is currently going.
I wish to voice my opposition to this terrible decision. As you may be aware, there have been many residents, including myself, who have taken the time to show up to town hall meetings with Mr. Khamis and the owners of Waste Management where we have voiced our concerns over the additional traffic, pollution, garbage strewn roadways and noise.
In addition to all that, my husband and I have personally been the victims of THREE flat tires in the last year as a result of the trucks that drop dangerous debris on the road. This has cost us approximately $1000.00 in new tire replacement costs. Unfortunately my tires cannot be repaired when I have a flat and must be replaced. With the addition of more trucks this problem will become worse for all of us that use Guadalupe Mines Road. This particular area is already so congested given the two lane road issue and the addition of new housing on the corner. There is only one way in and out of this area and I fear that if there were ever a fire or something worse on this road, it could be catastrophic with all the truck traffic and residents trying to flee. The road is being narrowed to accommodate a sidewalk near the new homes on the corner of Guadalupe Mines Road which has been forcing traffic headed to the landfill to cross over the center line into the opposite lane of traffic headed towards Camden, a very unsafe situation. The city decided to change the zoning from industrial to residential years ago and as such it is time to start scaling back landfill operations and recognize that this is a residential area and not a trucking zone.
The environmental impact of operating a landfill so close to residences and parks is dangerous given this latest recent example: http://www.mercurynews.com/2011/12/10/wa...
Property values are also being affected by all this, my home has depreciated 50,000.00 over the last year since all this has started. In the nineteen years that I have lived in this house it has NEVER gone down in value until now.
We vehemently oppose this action, regardless of Waste Management's right to conduct it's business under current laws. We ask you for your vote against the hauling of Newby's waste to Guadalupe Landfill by approving
the expansion of Newby Island for the time being until a better alternative site away from residential areas can be determined.
Regards, Margie Hinman 1735 Via Cortina San Jose, Ca 95120 408-927-5307
From: linna Chen Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 11:51 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; Buzo, Fred; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; Oliverio, Pierluigi; District7; Herrera, Rose; District9; District 10 Subject: Letter to San Jose Officials about Waterstone Project (Milpitas) Dear San Jose Officials, SoliconCore Technology management has been notified that the City of San Jose Planning Commission will be deciding on effectuating an unprecedented expansion of the Newby Island Landfill. This landfill is located less than 2 mil away from our business. The odor from this area has become more noticeable and disagreeable in the past few years. It has negatively impacted our ability to conduct our business by providing a comfortable environment for our Employees and clients Expansion to a towering height of 245 ft would only make the situation worse. We were alarmed to learn that the planning commission's review of Newby’s expansion has been based on an outdated EIR (2005-2008 study period) which identified many significant environmental impacts and proposed to rely on unproven mitigation measures assuming that Newby would be closed by the year 2025. SoliconCore Technology selected this location in anticipation of the same closure date of Newby. In light of more than 30 recurring violations issued by 5 regulatory agencies and an excessive number of confirmed odor complaints in the past 2 years, it is imperative that no permit be given until supplemental EIR is prepared in accordance with San Jose and California guidelines. We have also been informed that the Santa Clara Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan has reported to the state agency that there is over 20 years of excess landfill capacity due to waste diversion programs without requiring any expansion of the Newby Island landfill. Additionally, the City of Sunnyvale has offered the City of Milpitas partnership in SMaRT station and will now send the remaining waste to Kirby Canyon Landfill, which is located away from residential areas. With these superior alternatives available, it is sensible to retire Newby Island landfill by 2025 as planned. We believe that adhering to the 2025 closure date would agree with the city’s zero waste initiative. It would also be consistent with the planning and development of the surrounding area. Sincerely, Linna Chen
SiliconCore Technology, Inc. 890 Hillview Court, Suite 120 Milpitas, CA 95035, USA Tel: (408)946-8185 Fax: (408)946-8979 www.silicon-core.com NOTICE: This message is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise protected. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any transmission errors. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments. This ecommunication is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any person or entity in any location where such distribution or use would be contrary to law or regulation. The transmission and content of this e-communication cannot be guaranteed to be complete, accurate, secure or free of errors or viruses. Sender does not waive any intellectual property rights in this e-communication. All product pricing subject to final approval at the time the order is accepted.
From: Lia Zhu Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 6:17 PM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo Cc: District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District8; District9 Subject: please deny Newby Island Landfill expansion Dear sir/madam, I'm a resident near the Newby Island Landfill at Dixon Landing in San Jose, and our community stand firm with the denial of its expansion permit before a proper environmental impact report and water testing are conducted. Data show that over the two years the facility have received more than 5,000 odor complaints and numerous tickets for air pollution, while 44 landfills in the Bay Area have been shut down without expansion, according to reports. Expanding an already long-time landfill in a densely-populated area for another 30 years is not a wise and responsible act. We can understand the corporate's motive to do so because it's purely moneydriven. But as elected officials who are supposed to represent the residents' interests, please save Santa Clara water and environment and make your decision responsibly at the Dec 7 meeting. Sincerely. Lia Zhu A resident near the Newby Island Landfill
From: Binh Tran Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 10:49 AM To: Bustos, Rebecca Subject: Environment pollution Black Star
Dear San Jose City Councilmember: Please give Newby Landfill An Environment pollution Black Star. DO NOT REWARD IT WITH CONTRACT EXPANSION. Concerned Citizen Binh Tran
From: t w Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 10:52 AM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District9 Subject: Newby Island Landfill Expansion Dear All: Please kindly no Newby Island Landfill Expansion, please! The Odor from the Newby Island Landfill has already been unbearable. Your kind support will be greatly appreciated. Thank you so very much in advance. Milpitas resident, Therese Wang
From: Maxine Tsai Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 11:00 AM To:
[email protected]; Nick Pham;
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District1; District2; District3; District4; District5; District7; District9 Subject: Please deny the Newby landfill expansion Dear San Jose Mayor, City Council Members, and Planning Committee members, Before the Oakland fire took place last Friday, probably no one would believe such a catastrophe would happen even though there have been complains, concerns, and warnings about the building. The building owner probably never expected such a money generating opportunity would involve himself/herself in the big legal trouble, financial obligation, and lost of lives. Same here, evidences show that Newby has being leaking toxic contamination, built on a relatively weaker geology area in the earthquake prone Bay Area, and designed /built 80+ years ago unjustifiable for further expansion... etc. Please listen to and learn from what history teaches us! Newby landfill expansion should be denied before comprehensive EIR and water testing is conducted. Please save Santa Clara water and environment. Please make your decision responsibly. Sincerely, Maxine Tsai
From:
[email protected] on behalf of Vin Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 11:33 AM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Buzo, Fred; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo; District4 Subject: Newby Island Garbage Dump Facility Expansion Agenda Dear Santa Clara County Mayor and Officers, I am a resident of Santa Clara County and wanted to voice my strong opposition against the possibility of Newby Island Dump expansion. Over a period of time, the residents of Milpitas have been forced to tolerate the sewer stench on an ongoing basis. As fellow residents, home owners and individuals with family and children, I am sure you can relate to the issue. I am positive you would not like to have a dump skyscraper next to your homes, where you live and your children play. The stench coming out of the dump as it is has been so strong, that we end up with watery eyes, with our cloth smelling, and almost impossible for our children to venture out in our backyards or parks. We are having respiratory and health issues owing to the existing Newby dump. Any expansion will make it a nightmare. Not only the residents, this bad air and stench has been a source of nuisance for others including, the major revenue generating business in the area including CISCO, Broacade, Broadcom, Netapp to name just a few. The survey done by you and others attest to the fact that this dump has been and is a public nuisance. Also it is against the City of San Jose's code to permit any project which is a public nuisance within close proximity of residences. We all strongly believe that the garbage collection facility needs to be moved out for us to make Santa Clara County more attractive to residents and business (just as the same happened for Palo Alto and other major cities). A public nuisance cannot be allowed to be within the community and expand regardless of the low lost revenue impact its closure will have. Any revenue lost can be easily made up from increase in housing projects/ prices and increase in business and people coming to live here. You the leaders can influence the decision to find other alternatives/ locations away from dense population and economic centers for the relocation of Newby Island facility. We the residents and the voters are counting on you to live up to your commitment to the county and help us make it a thriving community by eliminating this sky scraper of dump and garbage by denying the Newby Island expansion and secondly closing down this dump and moving/ shifting it outside the county. We are positive that this will impact the bottom line for Santa Clara Country favorable by bringing in more housing and business related taxes and income. Thanking you for your support in caring for the health of the residents as well as economic growth for the Santa Clara county..!
Sincerely Vineet Mishra
From:
[email protected] Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 12:49 PM To:
[email protected] Cc:
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca;
[email protected] Subject: RE: SOUTH FREMONT RESIDENTS - Request for Fremont City Manager's Office Participate in SJ Council Meeting
Hello Sreekanth, Thank you for your email regarding tonight’s City of San Jose Planning Commission Hearing to be held in the San Jose City Council Chambers at 6:30 pm. Under Item 4, the San Jose Planning Commission will be holding an Administrative Hearing on the appeal of the Planning Director’s decision to approve a Planned Development Permit to allow a vertical expansion to the existing Newby Island Sanitary Landfill. Kathy Cote, the City of Fremont’s Environmental Services Manager, who oversees Integrated Waste Management and Urban Runoff in the City of Fremont, will attend the Planning Commission Hearing this evening. As a matter of public record and via this email, I will be forwarding your email Rebecca Bustos, the Project Manager in the City of San Jose’s Planning Department, so that your comments can be made part of the public record for this evening’s meeting. Regards, Suzanne CONNECT WITH US
Suzanne Wolf Director City of Fremont • Community Services (510) 494-4329 office • (510) 494-4753 fax
[email protected] • www.fremont.gov
Creating Community Through People, Parks & Programs
From: Sreekanth Kannan [mailto:
[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 10:17 PM To: Patrice Jamison Subject: SOUTH FREMONT RESIDENTS - Request for Fremont City Manager's Office Participate in SJ Council Meeting
Hello Patrice, It was great talking to you today morning regarding the Newby Landfill expansion permit hearing by San Jose City Council, tomorrow 6:30pm. Agenda and other details in this link: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/62862 I represent 18,000 online and 5000 paper petition signers asking for No on Newby Landfill Expansion Approval. I am writing this email to urge FREMONT CITY MANAGER OFFICE to support the rejection of the Newby Landfill expansion application at the scheduled December 7th San Jose planning committee meeting in the City hall at 6:30pm. Newby Landfill got 11 public nuisance tickets, 6 odor NOVs from gas leaking, MRF, and compost in 17 months; an average of once a month (Note: these numbers are from the latest Odor Study Report)! The environmental impact is very significant! According to the CEQA guidelines, no new project with a significant environmental impact can be approved. The research found that 44 landfills in the SF bay were closed when reaching their max capacity. Newby Landfill, with such poor operating records, should be closed at its max capacity with no exception. In my opinion, and I hope you will agree with me, that protecting public health is the indisputable duty of government officials. All officials with authority to approve any project with environmental impacts should follow the CEQA guidelines and San Jose municipal codes. Newby landfill sit at multi cities and towns and located upwind of residential areas. Newby Landfill cause serious public nuisanceand have tried all methods to mitigate odors with no success. The Newby Landfill has no reason to get an expansion! Based on the suggestion from Mayor-elect, Lily Mei's office - we request you to nominate a city manager representative to be present in the SJ Council meeting and take note of the residents plea, thank you and sincerely, Sreekanth Phone: (408)529-2911
From: how young Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 1:13 PM To:
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; Bustos, Rebecca; Berry, Whitney Subject: agenda item Dec 7 - Please do not approve Newby Island landfill expansion
Dear Commissioners, I am a long time resident of Milpitas and the Bay Area. The strong odors are a regional problem. Everyone knows it smells in Milpitas and this surrounding area. However, the system in place appears to make no issue of this and makes it seem like there is not a problem. Its hard to believe but from a citizens perspective, its not fair and Newby just has too much political power over the areas residents. I have shown up along with many residents to many meetings that seem to wear us down, against a company with tons of funds to munipulate San Jose and Milpitas citizens. This is really a social injustice to the residents of Milpitas. Even the Bay Area Air Quality District points to huge flaws in the odor study. This decision will affect everyone in the region for the next 30 plus years. The operators of Newby Island have not been good neighbors, they could have eased the situation but choose not to for decades. Its time to correct this and make a decision that will better the region. Please deny the expansion of Newby Island landfill. Many future generations health and wellness will thank you. Thanks and your time and please help. Howard Young 1137 Kovanda Way Milpitas, CA 95035
From: Larry Hottenstein, Partner, ERM Date: December 6, 2016
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Letter from Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP submitted to the Planning Commission on behalf of the City of Milpitas dated October 25, 2016
Page 11 – Item 3 – the specific opinions referenced from the BCH and CalRecovery reports are addressed below for each specific comment.
Letter from Paul Miller and Michael Ratte, BCH Group dated October 25, 2016 Bullet #1, Page 1 – the 4,810 odor complaints recorded by the BAAQMD represented the total number of odor complaints received from the “greater Milpitas area”, which included the City of Milpitas, City of Fremont, and the City of San Jose and were not necessarily attributed to Newby Island Resource Recovery Park (NIRRP). Bullet #2, Page 2 – the 232 “confirmed” odor complaints attributed to NIRRP represent approximately 4 percent of the total 5,717 odor complaints received during the December 2014 to June 2016 time period. In addition, these 232 complaints occurred on only approximately 109 days out of the 577 days in this time period. Bullet #4, Page 2 – the odor modeling analysis is generally conservative by assuming that the odor emissions are constant over the time period modeled and represents potential odor occurrences somewhere in the defined area, not actual complaints. Based on actual odor complaints received during this time period, not all potential offsite odors will result in complaints. A complaint may not occur due to the spatial location of the predicted odors > 4 D/T with respect to the population. Also, the variability of the actual emissions means that the assumed constant emission rate used in the modeling may not occur simultaneously with the worst-case meteorology. To assume that each potential modeled odor occurrence results in 10 odor complaints, yielding a total of 50,050 complaints from Fremont and Milpitas, clearly overstates the issue and is not borne out by actual odor complaint records. 1
Bullet #5, Page 3 – electronic input and output files for the modeling analyses has been provided. Bullet #6, Page 3 – as stated in the report, on-site odor observations and hydrogen sulfide measurements made during the two measurement programs did not show fugitive emissions of landfill gas as a major contributor to off-site odors. Because of the very high odor concentration measured for the landfill gas of > 60,000 D/T, any fugitive emissions of landfill gas would have been readily detectable. Apparently the installation of over 100 new landfill gas wells provided improved capture of landfill gas from earlier reports of fugitive landfill gas odor emissions. Bullet #7, Page 3 – Odor emission samples were collected at different locations, at different times of day, and on different days during two seasonal periods to represent the range of emissions. Seasonal differences and a variety of meteorological conditions will influence the transport and dispersal of odors from the various NIRRP sources to off-site receptors, but will have little influence on the actual odor emission rates from these sources, which is why a dispersion model is used with a year of actual meteorological data to predict off-site odor levels from those emissions. Bullet #8, Page 4 – the biosolids being stockpiled during the first field sampling program were relatively dry. During the second field sampling program, there was no biosolids stockpiling activity and the stockpiled area was covered with a layer of wood chips. Bullet #9, Page 4 – due to the nature of most of the process operations, odor emission concentrations can vary greatly by specific location or activity within the process area. For example, the working face of the landfill may have a wide range of odor emissions associated with specific loads deposited. Some waste loads may be highly odorous, while others may not have any odor. In general, odor samples were only collected when odors were present. When modeling the working face as an area source (approximately 1.5 acres), it would not be appropriate to assign the highest odor concentration measured from a single truck load to represent the overall odor emission rate from the entire working face over time. Therefore, average measured odor concentrations were used. This is still considered a conservative approach, since the model assumes constant emissions during all working face operations, even when emissions may not be occurring. In addition, the model assumes that these constant emissions occur simultaneously with meteorological conditions, producing off-site odors > 4 D/T.
2
Bullet #10, Page 4 – an Excel Workbook has been provided that was used to convert sample odor concentration results to odor emission rates. In general, the AERMOD model requires a total mass per time emission rate (represented as grams/sec or grams per second per square meter, depending on the source type). Odors are not measured as a specific mass, but rather as a ratio of clean air volumes to odorous air volumes, which can be defined as an odor volume concentration. Thus, the total amount of odor volume must be calculated for input into the model as an emission rate. This is accomplished by multiplying the odor volume concentration (D/T) by the total volume rate that is emitting the odor. For point sources, the exhaust volumetric flow rate was used as the total volume rate. For fugitive odors being emitted out of buildings, the area of the opening times an assumed 0.1 meter per second speed of the air exiting the opening was used, representing natural draft. For fugitive odors being emitted from open surfaces, the rate of emissions exiting the surface was assumed to be 0.01 meters per second, representing volatilization. This value was multiplied by the area to estimate the total volume flow rate of odors for model input. Intermittent sources had emissions averaged over the time periods modeled. Bullet #12, Page 4 – meteorological data and AERMET input and output files have been provided. Bullet #13, Page 5 – a full year of valid on-site meteorological data was not available at the time of the modeling analysis. A comparison of on-site meteorological data with San Jose Airport data was performed for the months where concurrent data were available and San Jose Airport data was deemed representative of local wind direction and wind speed patterns at NIRRP. Therefore, San Jose Airport data was used because it is collected from a recognized National Weather Service station, had a full year of data corresponding to the desired time period (2015), and was determined to be representative of on-site conditions at NIRRP. The most recent year of available meteorological data (2015) was utilized for the modeling analysis to compare with 2015 odor complaint records and recent NIRRP operations. Bullet #14, Page 5 – model input and output files and assumptions used have been provided. Bullet #15, Page 5 – building downwash was incorporated for the baghouse stacks associated with the MRF. Bullet #16, Page 5 – duplicative modeling using both AERMOD and CALPUFF dispersion modeling systems was not performed because CALPUFF is currently only 3
approved by the USEPA for far-field modeling analyses (> 50 kilometers) and will soon lose its approval status for any regulatory modeling application. Bullet #17, Page 6 – intermittent sources were modeled for specific time periods to reflect specific short-term operations or processes. Green waste grinding was, in fact, modeled as an intermittent source operating only from 6 am to 3 pm daily. It is not feasible to establish variable emission rates for all hours of the year from all of the process areas due to the variable nature of wastes received and individual process operations. Bullet #20, Page 6 – the modeling receptor grid was established around defined communities, which presumably have known concentrations, although population density was not within the scope of this modeling analysis. Model receptors were not placed where there was no population, i.e. west of NIRRP. Bullets #21, Page 7 – the recommendations for odor reduction were general in nature and in some cases represent best management practices. It was beyond the scope of this study to provide detailed engineering analyses of odor control measures for specific process areas and process operations. Bullet #23, Page 7 – predicting potential off-site odor levels from the increased landfill height was beyond the scope of this study and would not be possible without a detailed landfill expansion plan showing the locations of specific process areas over the years of landfill expansion. There is no basis for the conclusion of BCH Group that “the proposed project would clearly result in a substantial increase in the severity and/or duration of the odor impacts.”
Letter from George Savage, CalRecovery, Inc. dated October 25, 2016 Item #1, Bullet #1 – ambient odor monitoring was conducted periodically downwind of NIRRP during both field sampling programs in Milpitas and in adjacent areas. Monitoring was conducted at varying times of day, including early morning hours during calm wind conditions. For the most part, no odors attributable to NIRRP were detected off-site and never in Milpitas. On one or two occasions a faint landfill odor was observed at the entrance to NIRRP and along the frontage road downwind of the MRF.
4
Item #1, Bullet #2 - an Excel Workbook has been provided that was used to convert sample odor concentration results to odor emission rates. In general, the AERMOD model requires a total mass per time emission rate (represented as grams/sec or grams per second per square meter, depending on the source type). Odors are not measured as a specific mass, but rather as a ratio of clean air volumes to odorous air volumes, which can be defined as an odor volume concentration. Thus, the total amount of odor volume must be calculated for input into the model as an emission rate. This is accomplished by multiplying the odor volume concentration (D/T) by the total volume rate that is emitting the odor. For point sources, the exhaust volumetric flow rate was used as the total volume rate. For fugitive odors being emitted out of buildings, the area of the opening times an assumed 0.1 meter per second speed of the air exiting the opening was used, representing natural draft. For fugitive odors being emitted from open surfaces, the rate of emissions exiting the surface was assumed to be 0.01 meters per second, representing volatilization. This value was multiplied by the area to estimate the total volume flow rate of odors for model input. Intermittent sources had emissions averaged over the time periods modeled. Item #1, Bullet #3 – meteorological data for the one year modeled (2015) have been provided. Item #1, Bullet #4 - the biosolids being stockpiled during the first field sampling program were relatively dry. During the second field sampling program, there was no biosolids stockpiling activity and the stockpiled area was covered with a layer of wood chips. Item #1, Bullet #6 - the recommendations for odor reduction were general in nature and in some cases represent best management practices. It was beyond the scope of this study to provide detailed engineering analyses of odor control measures for specific process areas and process operations.
Attachments 1) Letter from Paul Miller and Michael Ratte, BCH Group dated October 25, 2016 2) Letter from George Savage, CalRecovery, Inc. dated October 25, 2016
5
