LINCOLNVILLE AND WEST AUGUSTINE DUMPING SCANDAL – CHRONOLOGY
LINCOLNVILLE AND WEST AUGUSTINE DUMPING SCANDAL – CHRONOLOGY
“Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.”
— the late U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.)
"Justice delayed is justice denied." – Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Starting circa 1905
■ Dumping of household trash, sewage sludge and industrial trash in the historic Lincolnville community, from the present location of the Willie Gallimore Center south. This and other dumps in St. Augustine and St. Johns County are never remediated.
■ Location of City’s sewage treatment plant in Lincolnville at south end of Riberia Street.
■ Location of Atlanta Gas Light coal-to-gas plant in Lincolnville at north end of Riberia Street.
■ Location of polluting boatyards in Lincolnville.
■ Location of City’s garage and water treatment plant in West Augustine
June 12, 1964
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. writes letter from jail to clergy, calls CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE “most lawless” city in America. President Johnson signs 1964 Civil Rights Act in July 1964.
1970
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established after first Earth Day.
1988
CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE ceases using Old City Reservoir, still backup water supply.
1991
■ Environmental Justice (EJ) movement begun to remedy low-income and minority communities bearing disproportionate share of dumping and pollution.
■ No evident effort by CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE to examine the legacy of decades of dumping decisions affecting low-income and minority communities of Lincolnville and West Augustine.
1995
Then-City Manager WILLIAM POMAR writes and promises Army Corps of Engineers to dispose of all refuse properly in the creation of an artificial wetland at the south end of Riberia Street.
2000-2005
■ EPA holds public hearings in St. Augustine before approving cleanup of old coal-to-gas plant at location planned for Sebastian Inner Harbor.
■ AKERMAN SENTERFITT lawyer WILLIAM L. PENCE represents the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE as its environmental counsel and is at all times since available to answer questions by City officials on environmental issues..
■ PENCE, asserts that the cleanup of the Sebastian Inner Harbor Project was “successful.”
http://proceedings.swix.ws/2005_10_09_Brownfields/content/pdf/Pence.pdf
September 27, 2005
City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, signed $200,000 contract for hauling for Riberia Street site, without any City Commission approval sought or required.
December 1, 2005
GREGORY J. STRONG, a marketing executive for a petroleum industry supplier and past environmental regulatory manager for polluters fined hundreds of thousands of dollars by EPA, becomes Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Northeast Florida District Director.
December 9, 2005
St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) biologist, at the Old City Reservoir site, tells CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE officials not to dump without permit. City starts illegal dumping the next day, without ever calling lawyer PENCE at AKERMAN SENTERFITT..
December 10, 2005
Illegal dumping of some 60,000,000 pounds of contaminants – including arsenic, thallium and vinyl chloride – begins in the Old City Reservoir, in secrecy, without public notice.
December 12, 2005
St. Augustine City Commission agrees, without voting, to allow Civil Rights Foot Soldiers Monument in the Slave Market Square (Plaza de la Constitución), rejecting City Manager HARRISS’ claim that only “colonial” history was suitable, while agreeing with HARRISS’ demand that the victims of the City’s discrimination had to raise funds for the monument.
January 9, 2006
■ Certified letter from FDEP responds to permit application, tells St. Augustine not to dump without a permit.
■ Illegal dumping continues in Old City Reservoir.
February 17, 2006
■ Illegal dumping reported to National Response Center in Washington, D.C.. (Report 788280)
■ Illegal dumping continues in Old City Reservoir.
February 24, 2006
■ Mayor GEORGE GARDNER defends illegal dumping, says it’s only “clean fill.”
■ “There are no bedsprings in clean fill” as EPA expert John Marler explains.
■ Former EPA Region 4 Regional Administrator John Henry Hankinson states that the coquina pit lake where the illegal dumping took place is an “open sore going straight down to the aquifer and the groundwater.”
■ City Public Affairs Director Paul Williamson claims that the City’s $30,000 document camera/podium will be unavailable to members of the public February 27 to show any documents or videos.
■ City Manager HARRISS, when asked about whether he had permit, responds: “I’ll get one.“ He never does. Illegal dumping continues in Old City Reservoir.
February 27, 2006
■ Assistant City Manager JOHN REGAN, P.E. tells Ed Slavin that “because of what you [Slavin] have done, it will be a long process.” Ed Slavin tells REGAN that it is the City, not him that did the polluting.
■ REGAN twice asks Ed Slavin for copy of DVD provided to Federal and State environmental crimes investigators.
■ Ed Slavin declines to provide DVD to REGAN, based upon request from Federal and State criminal investigators.
■ REGAN asserts to Ed Slavin that the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE was “in a hurry” to finish wetland remediation in order to begin the Sebastian Inner Harbor Project.
■ REGAN sends E-mail to CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER PAUL WILLIAMSON, inter alia using pejoratives about questions being asked on Respondent COSA’s illegal dumping in Old City Reservoir:
"Suggested RESPONSE: 'Your request for information has been forwarded to the City Attorney for response.' THE END. - And do not respond to anymore (sic) of his E- mails unless the above is the response.' Any further attempt to 'answer' any of his outlandish (sic) and absurd (sic) questions and accusations only serves to fuel his misguided (sic) filibustering (sic) and empty (sic) threats (sic). He has nothing (sic) else (sic) to do with his life and his only (sic) 'contact' with the outside world is through emails (sic). Suggest allowing Wilson to "handle" the responses.
JR
■ Mayor GEORGE GARDENER publicly promises “answers” to Ed Slavin’s questions. None provided yet.
■ Illegal dumping continues in Old City Reservoir..
March 1, 2006
■ Illegal dumping continues in Old City Reservoir two (2) days later – FDEP’s Brian Durden photographs illegal dumping after criminal investigators arrive.
■ In the presence of AKERMAN SENTERFITT partner WILLIAM PENCE, Esquire, then-CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE Public Works Director WILLIAM LEETCH and other CITY employees told EPA and FDEP criminal investigators that mainly clean materials were dumped at the Old City Reservoir and only 80 cubic yards of “unsuitable” material were dumped. (PX-12). This information was not accurate.
March 13, 2006
■ Then-Commissioner (now Mayor) JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. says he is “tired” of people “trashing” City Manager HARRISS, which Vice Mayor and Commissioner SUSAN BURK says is only by “one (sic) disgruntled (sic) citizen” raising concerns about illegal dumping.
■ All five City Commissioners vote unanimously to give HARRISS an honor (a plaque) and vote to express their “confidence” in HARRISS.
March 15, 2006
■ FDEP orders the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE to remove the solid waste from the Old City Reservoir lake and put it in a Class I landfill no later than April 17, 2006.
■ Twenty months later, the cleanup has not been done.
■ CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, AKERMAN SENTERFITT and GEOSYNTEC start spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, delaying Old City Reservoir cleanup by 2-3 years.
March 23, 2006
Clay County Grand Jury indicts three county officials for illegal dumping in widely reported $9,000,000 dumping scandal, which began in 2004.
March 27, 2006
Taxpayer-purchased plaque publicly presented to HARRISS by all five City Commissioners, lavishing praise. Mayor GARDNER, Vice Mayor BURK and Commissioners CRICHLOW, JONES and BOLES are photographed with HARRISS, expressing confidence in him, discouraging cooperation with ongoing criminal investigation and may constitute obstruction of justice. The proclamation stated: P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE is extraordinary among places in the world and is fortunate to have William B. “Bill” Harriss as its City Manager, a person whose passion for the City and professional commitment to the City is unmatched; and
WHEREAS, in his more than two decades of service to the people of St. Augustine as Chief Financial Officer, General Services Director, Assistant City Manager and now as City Manager, Mr. Harriss’ philosophy (sic) of administration through strong team-building consistently inspires the City’s more than 350 employees to aspire to do their best, and
WHEREAS, through responsible fiscal planning, Mr. Harriss has ensured the City’s solid financial standing and earned its sound management the highest respect; and
WHEREAS, with honest enthusiasm for the highest level of proficiency in every aspect of his work, Mr. Harriss’ prudent (sic) management has resulted in improved reliability of service for the City’s 10,000 utility customers while continually upgrading infrastructure, and
WHEREAS, by making public safety a high priority, Mr. Harriss has lead (sic) the fire and police departments to create a safe community for the City’s 14,000 residents and millions of annual visitors.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is with great pride (sic) that the St. Augustine City Commission recognizes the outstanding contributions made by William B. “Bill” Harriss to the people of St. Augustine, commends him for his professional commitment, and expresses its full confidence in his management of the City.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our signatures and caused the Seal of the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE to be affixed this 27th day of March in the year of our Lord two thousand six and the four hundred fortieth year of the founding of St. Augustine, the Nation’s Oldest City.
George Gardner, Mayor, Susan Burk, Vice Mayor, Joseph Boles, Commissioner,
Donald Crichlow, Commissioner, Errol Jones, Commissioner
March 28, 2006
In a consent to search form, JOHN REGAN, P.E., Assistant City Manager, admitted that the location in question is the "OLD CITY RESERVOIR," after City officials quibbled about the name (and anonymous postings on St. Augustine Record's "Talk of the Town" website denied it was the OLD CITY RESERVOIR. (PX-13).
Early April 2006
Illegal dumping first publicly reported in two small newspapers -- the Collective Press (St. Augustine monthly) and Out in the City (Jacksonville monthly).
April 10, 2006
Commissioners announce, without voting, their “understanding” that public comments by one individual can be either at the beginning or at the end of Commission meetings, but not both. This violates the Commission’s longstanding practice of allowing Ed Slavin, et al. to speak at both the beginning and at the end of Commission meetings.
April 13, 2006
Front page St. Augustine Record article by prize-winning reporter Kati Bexley reports illegal dumping (8th anniversary of HARRISS’ hiring without national search or Sunshine notice).
April 14, 2006
Dr. Dwight Hines, Ph.D. files lawsuit against City for Open Records violations involving his requests for records on city trucks, including those haulting contaminants from Riberia Street to Holmes Blvd.
April 24, 2006
City Commissioner JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR., Esquire states that the City needs to seek attorney fees and monetary sanctions against Dr. Hines to make him “pay the piper,” threatening him and anyone else who files an Open Record lawsuit with a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP suit), possibly violating Florida law against government SLAPP suits.. Commissioner and Vice Mayor SUSAN BURK, Esquire amended her motion to hire Upchurch, Bailey and Upchurch to seek attorney fees for supposedly frivolous litigation. City Clerk Martha V. (Nell) Porter later confirms to Dr. Hines and Ed Slavin that Commissioners did not have a copy of Hines’ Open Record lawsuit when they termed it frivolous and voted to seek attorney fees to make him “pay the piper.”
May 23, 2006
CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE Chief Administrative Officer TIMOTHY BURCHFIELD signs affidavit claiming records sought by Dr. Hines do not exist. In January 2007, CITY provides 45 pounds of records claimed not to exist, later providing computer disk that could not be read (claimed to contain.
August 8, 2006
At initial court hearing in Dr. Hines’ Open Records case where monetary sanctions were threatened, CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE outside counsel Sidney Ansbacher provides Dr. Hines with 45 pounds of documents City previously claimed did not exist on truck use, including hauling of contaminants.
August 22, 2006
CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE CITY MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS writes a “Dear Chief” letter to FDEP Chief of Law Enforcement, GREA BEAVIS, asserting reasons for not prosecuting the CITY, including Messrs. JOHN REGAN, P.E. and WILLIAM LEETCH, P.E., attending “the Florida Chamber of Commerce Environmental Permitting Summer School and short course held at Marco Island this past July.” (PX-10).
August 25, 2006
■ Refusing to bring any criminal charges against the Respondent CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, GREA BEAVIS, Chief of Investigations, FDEP Division of Law Enforcement, sent a letter to CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE CITY MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS (PX-9), stating he relied upon representations in HARRISS’ August 22, 2006 letter (stamped as being received by FDEP August 24, 2006). No copy of the Florida Chamber of Commerce’s course material or proof of attendance or grades was ever provided to BEAVIS or FDEP. A full-color brochure on the Florida Chamber of Commerce Environmental Permitting Summer School shows that it is lacking in balance, dominated by corporate law firms and consultants. http://www.floridaenet.com/pdfs/2006summerschool.pdf
■ Nothing in FDEP’s undated, unsigned, “CASE CRITERIA” (CX-11) suggests that municipal engineers attending a Chamber of Commerce course is good cause for declining to prosecute the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE for dumping “solid waste” in a “lake.”
■ No meeting minutes or notes of the meetings between HARRISS and FDEP have yet been provided by FDEP.
■ No report of interview form (or Offense/Incident Report/Narrative form) of any meeting between HARRISS and FDEP has yet been provided by FDEP.
■ FDEP criminal investigators’ records reflect no investigation of perjury, obstruction of justice or any past dumping prior to December 2006
■ In closing a criminal case involving contamination of the Old City Reservoir with arsenic and other toxicants, FDEP’s Bureau of Environmental Investigations (BEI) "investigation" concluded, "No (sic) economic or specific motive for permit violations could be identified."
October 12, 2006
City Attorney JAMES PATRICK WILSON resigns, effective January 31, 2007.
October 13, 2006:
■ Vice Mayor and Commissioner BURK moves to accept WILSON’s resignation immediately, paying him without requiring attendance at work through January 31, 2007.
■ Vice Mayor and Commissioner BURK moves to hire RONALD BROWN and DOBSON & BROWN, P.A. as the City’s temporary attorneys.
■ Neither action was preceded by proper Sunshine notice on the City’s website. No press or public attend the illegal “Special Meeting,” which was not asserted to be an “emergency.” State’s Attorney later refuses to take Sunshine violations to Grand Jury.
November 1, 2006
St. Augustine Chronicle runs cover story by reporter Frank Matzke on illegal dumping, the first publication to publish FDEP staffer Brian Durden’s March 1, 2006 photographs of illegal dumping continuing two (2) days after the criminal investigators arrived.
November 7, 2006
Ed Slavin requests HARRISS to preserve all documents and disable shredders. No response.
November 13, 2006
Mayor GEORGE GARDNER denounces Ed Slavin at last Commission meeting as Mayor, saying he asked too many questions, earning standing ovation by Commissioners, et al.
November 19, 2006
St. Augustine Record editorial (entitled “Always Stick to Your Guns”) denounces GARDNER for his attack on Slavin, chilling free speech rights, supports Slavin’s effort to inform the people.
November 22, 2006
St. Augustine Record reports FDEP’s proposed fine of the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE of more than $46,000, with FDEP’s calculations stating the amount of the fine was based on City’s lack of good faith. FDEP, waited until after the election.
December 16, 2006
Ed Slavin forgives ex-Mayor GARDNER, et al. in Christmas column in St. Augustine Record.
December 22, 2006
Commissioner BURK moves to hire RONALD BROWN as permanent City Attorney without Sunshine notice of this item (agenda advertised only to discuss tax exemptions for low-income elderly residents).
January 17, 2007
“Basic outline of the City’s settlement proposal” states city will not agree to put solid waste in Class I landfill without a “binding final court order,” stating: “Under no circumstances, except for a final non-appealable court order, will the City agree to remove the fill (sic) material to a Class 1 landfill.” This position never discussed at City Commission meeting first.
March 12, 2007
ST. AUGUSTINE CITY ATTORNEY RONALD BROWN claims the mediation with Dr. Hines was a victory for CITY. No reference is made to “pay the piper” remark, now apparently inoperative.
January to November 2007
FDEP and CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE continue secret negotiations -- attendees include managers, lawyers, engineers and public relations spokerspersons.
June 13, 2007
Without public hearing, City Commissioners vote unanimously to redefine City boundary line to exclude Ed Slavin’s residence from City of St. Augustine, where he has voted since 2000.
June 18, 2007
FDEP District Director STRONG spoke at an EPA Community Involvement Training Conference seminar in Jacksonville, Florida. (PX-8B). Agenda focused on environmental justice issues (PX-8B) and included optional field trip to St. Augustine’s coal-to-gas plan. (PX-8B).
September 2007
City Commissioners and staff refuse to answer questions on City budget at two (2) public hearings and a workshop, including questions on budgeting for environmental cleanup of Old City Reservoir.
September 18, 2007
City’s AKERMAN SENTE$FITT lawyers file with FDEP "Report of Results of SPLP Sampling of Fill Material from the Holmes Boulevard Borrow Pit."
October 2, 2007
City’s lawyers file with FDEP – without notifying the public – their "Fill Removal and Relocation Plan for Holmes Boulevard Borrow Pit and Riberia Street Waste Disposal Area, Revision 3", October 2, 2007 ("R&R Plan"), which describes the methods and means proposed to remove “solid waste” from Holmes Site to Riberia Street dump.
November 1, 2007
St. Augustine Record editorial (entitled “Let the public speak early”) calls for restoring public comment to start of City Commission meetings. Commissioners had referenced three speakers (B.J. Kalaidi, David Thundershield Queen and Ed Slavin in violating public’s First Amendment rights).
November 6, 2007
Assistant City Manager JOHN REGAN writes City Manager HARRIS, requesting City Commission consideration of proposed Consent Order.
November 9, 2007
At approximately 2:38 PM EST, CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE gives E-mail notice Consent Order will be on agenda for November 13, 2007 City Commission meeting.
November 11, 2007
St. Augustine Record editorial gives public notice of right of public to speak on bringing waste back to Lincolnville at 8 AM meeting on November 13, 2007.
November 13, 2007
■ Consent Order only briefly discussed at meeting that commenced at 8 A.M., the day after Veteran’s Day holiday, outside the ordinary course of business, with minimal notice the preceding Friday (November 9, 2007)
■ Commissioner and ex-Mayor GEORGE GARDNER and Commissioner and ex-Vice Mayor SUSAN BURK left the meeting before dumping is discussed.
■ Commissioners ask no tough questions and learn no new information..
■ Effects upon Lincolnville residents are not discussed.
■ St. Augustine City Commissioner ERROL JONES makes the motion, seconded by City Commissioner DONALD CRICHLOW, to approve the Consent Order sending solid waste back to Lincolnville, giving City 475 days to remove contaminants from Old City Reservoir. Vote is 3-0.
■ Mayor JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. denies the public the right to speak on Consent Order, supported by City Attorney RONALD BROWN, who claims that there was no “advertisement” of a “public hearing.” BOLES threatens arrests, motions to police officers.
■ HARRISS refuses calls to resign, saying “I’ve done nothing wrong.”
■ Later that afternoon, JOHN REGAN tells Messrs. Slavin and Seraphin, et al that it would have taken fifteen (15) minutes or less for AKERMAN SENTERFITT environmental lawyer WILLIAM PENCE to have told Respondent COSA not to dump, if only CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE officials had asked or requested him to do so.
■ REGAN tells Messrs. Slavin and Seraphin, et al. that it would have cost seventy-five dollars ($75) for WILLIAM PENCE to have told Respondent COSA not to dump, if only CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE officials had asked PENCE about the dumping before commencing it.
December 8, 2007
■ Consent Order advertised in St. Augustine Record, giving persons twenty-one (21) days within which to petition for review and request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
December 12, 2007
■ It's cheaper" was the main reason offered by City in defending the proposed Consent Order sending contaminated materials back into the Lincolnville community. December 12, 2007, St. Augustine Record @1, quoting Mr. JOHN REGAN.
December 13, 2007
■ Florida Times-Union reporter Deirdre Conner reports dumping controversy.
■ City Commissioners JONES and GARDNER attend meeting of “Stop the Dump,” with some 80 people in attendance.
■ FDEP District Director STRONG tells Ed Slavin in telephone conversation that what happened in St. Augustine in 1964 was “irrelevant” to St. Augustine’s illegal dumping and institutional racism today.
■ REGAN repeated that statement about it being “cheaper.”.
■ REGAN inaccurately called the illegal dumping a “giant, giant technical (sic) mistake.”
■ REGAN correctly called the coquina pit a “lake.”
■ REGAN apologized for the illegal dumping in the Old City Reservoir.
■ REGAN said the City’s notion of sending the solid waste back to Lincolnville is “counterintutive” and “a little bizarre.”
■ REGAN said there had been dumps for decades on City-owned property from the current location of the Willie Gallimore Center southward.
■ REGAN, said that there were “many, many dumps” in St. Augustine, Florida.
■ REGAN says City performed “root cause analysis” and had “reorganized” as a result of the illegal dumping – on January 9, 2008, REGAN admitted there was nothing in writing.
■ FDEP District Director STRONG and other FDEP staff attended the community meeting but did not speak or answer questions or identify themselves.
■ FDEP claims it needs seven (7) days advance notice to meet with a citizens group, citing Sunshine law for this dubious proposition.
December 18, 2007
■ Folio Weekly Editor Anne Schindler exposes the City’s lawbreaking in her editor’s column, (entitled “Dirty Deeds”) calling for criminal prosecution of City officials responsible for dumping, comparing situation to Clay County’s illegal dumping.
December 27, 2007
■ Seven citizens petition FDEP to review the Consent Order, detailing allegations of environmental racism and denial of public’s right to speak in a 20 page filing.
December 31, 2007
■ Seven citizens ask FDEP to hold City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, Mayor and Commissioner JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR. Vice Mayor CRICHLOW, ex-Vice Mayor SUSAN BURK, Commissioner and ex-Mayor GEORGE GARDNER, and Commissioner ERROL JONES as individual respondents subject to potential personal liability for the illegal dumping, also asking for a March 10, 2008 trial date and seeking discovery of documents from CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, FDEP, Akerman Senterfitt and Geosyntec Consultants.
January 7, 2008
■ CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE asserts in the St. Augustine Record that it is concerned citizens who have “stymied” cleanup by requesting a hearing on taking waste back to Lincolnville, saying the cleanup will be delayed 150 days.
■ REGAN quoted in St. Augustine record as saying “Outside from a few individuals, we’re not hearing from the public on this, and we really want to make sure the public understands this project.”
January 9, 2008
■ Assistant City Manager JOHN REGAN admits “root cause analysis” of reasons for illegal dumping, which he reported at the December 13, 2007 meeting, was unwritten (inconsistent with engineering standards for such analysis)..
■ CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, FDEP, AKERMAN SENTERFITT and GEOSYNTEC fail to provide copies of speakers’ curriculum vitae or complete Powerpoin® t presentations for the January 10, 2007 meeting.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE has violated environmental laws, committed environmental crimes and avoided meaningful law enforcement for two (2) years.
2. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE was not candid with federal and state investigators or with citizens and journalists.
3. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE has delayed the cleanup of the Old City Reservoir for two (2) years, without justification or excuse, risking contamination.
4. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, its law firm (AKERMAN SENTERFITT) and the law firm’s engineering firm (GEOSYNTEC) all worked in secret with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), devised the supposed “remedy” or returning contaminants to Lincolnville, without a public hearing or consulting anyone, denying the public the right to speak at the November 13, 2007 meeting and repeatedly discouraging and limiting public comment since February 2006 report to National Response Center.
5. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE lacks respect for human rights and our environment.
6. The Consent Decree between FDEP and the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE is a stench in the nostrils of the Nation and must be rejected.
7. The Holmes Blvd. and Riberia Street sites both must be cleaned up, along with our City government. We need an Inspector General, Ombuds and transparency.
8. Officials responsible for illegal dumping and coverups must be investigated by a Grand Jury, just like those in Clay County, Florida..
9. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE needs a whistleblower protection ordinance to assure that employees can report problems to Commissioners, law enforcement and journalists..
10. The CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE urgently needs an Environmental Justice ordinance and a City Commissioner, Manager and staff pledged to respect our environment and civil rights.. As Al Gore, Jr. wrote in Earth in the Balance (1992), environmental problems are often associated with corruption.
In secret, behind locked gates, the managers of the Nation's oldest (European-founded) City illegally dumped 40,000 cubic yards of contaminants in the Old City Reservoir, where people fished and swam for generations.
Now our City and State want to bring the contaminants back to Lincolnville, negotiating in secret, without ever informing the two (2) affected Environmental Justice communities of Lincolnville and West Augustine.
Three City Commissioners (MAYOR JOSEPH LEROY BOLES, JR., VICE MAYOR DONALD CRICHLOW and Commissioner ERROL JONES) rubberrstamped a Consent Order without allowing promised public comment. Two other City Commissioners (GEORGE GARDNER and SUSAN BURK) left the meeting without either discussing or voting on the issue. This required citizens to act to commence an Administrative Law Judge hearing to obtain sworn candid answers and a full remedy.
St. Augustine's pollution symbolizes our City's putative leaders' lack of trust in the public's right to know. This is advanced citizenship. Please share your questions and whistleblower disclosures about City government, today and every day. Then let's demand answers. Expect democracy. “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8:32
For more information, please see www.cleanupcityofstaugustine.blogspot.com or contact Judith
Seraphin of the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association at 829-0808.
-30-
Note: PX references are to Petitioners’ Exhibits filed with FDEP in State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection v. City of St. Augustine. Attached is PX-3, Anne Schindler’s column from December 18, 2007 Folio Weekly.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Friday, January 11, 2008
City may abandon waste plans
City may abandon waste plans
MARCIA LANE
marcia.lane@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/11/08
St. Augustine City Commissioner Errol Jones says he'll push fellow commissioners to spend the extra money not to return landfill waste material to Riberia Street.
"I've heard enough," Jones said, striding to the front of St. Paul A.M.E. Church on Thursday evening after listening to more than two hours of presentations, discussion and protests.
He told the full house he would make a motion to spend the money that would take the material to a landfill.
That plan could cost about $2.2 million. Returning the material to Riberia would cost an estimated $800,000 and was the option the city was pursuing.
Jones's announcement drew a standing ovation and applause from the roomful of Lincolnville residents and supporters. Many had expressed concerns about the contents of the landfill material and the possible negative effects it would have on current and future generations.
Activist Ed Slavin called it a great victory "for the environment and for civil rights."
Lincolnville traditionally has been black and poor, although in recent years an influx of whites and richer individuals has driven up land prices and begun changing the character of the area.
The issue began when the city removed the dirt from an inactive landfill along the San Sebastian River to regrow the marsh and redevelop wetlands. The contaminated dirt was dumped in a borrow pit on North Holmes Boulevard
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection fined the city $33,698. The city agreed to clean the pit and put the dirt back on the Riberia site.
Consultants with the project say, even if the city decides to go the landfill route, the city will still have to come up with a solution for the Riberia site, which includes about eight acres.
One resident told city officials Thusday that he'd heard nothing but excuses and said residents were putting up with "taxation with little representation."
Thursday's session was billed as an educational meeting. Moderated by the city's John Regan, the meeting gave the public a chance to ask questions about the landfill plan. Most aired complaints and raised questions about the city's decision.
Regan said the meeting was intended to gain additional input and could lead to commissioners changing their plans.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/011108/news_news0111_003.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
MARCIA LANE
marcia.lane@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/11/08
St. Augustine City Commissioner Errol Jones says he'll push fellow commissioners to spend the extra money not to return landfill waste material to Riberia Street.
"I've heard enough," Jones said, striding to the front of St. Paul A.M.E. Church on Thursday evening after listening to more than two hours of presentations, discussion and protests.
He told the full house he would make a motion to spend the money that would take the material to a landfill.
That plan could cost about $2.2 million. Returning the material to Riberia would cost an estimated $800,000 and was the option the city was pursuing.
Jones's announcement drew a standing ovation and applause from the roomful of Lincolnville residents and supporters. Many had expressed concerns about the contents of the landfill material and the possible negative effects it would have on current and future generations.
Activist Ed Slavin called it a great victory "for the environment and for civil rights."
Lincolnville traditionally has been black and poor, although in recent years an influx of whites and richer individuals has driven up land prices and begun changing the character of the area.
The issue began when the city removed the dirt from an inactive landfill along the San Sebastian River to regrow the marsh and redevelop wetlands. The contaminated dirt was dumped in a borrow pit on North Holmes Boulevard
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection fined the city $33,698. The city agreed to clean the pit and put the dirt back on the Riberia site.
Consultants with the project say, even if the city decides to go the landfill route, the city will still have to come up with a solution for the Riberia site, which includes about eight acres.
One resident told city officials Thusday that he'd heard nothing but excuses and said residents were putting up with "taxation with little representation."
Thursday's session was billed as an educational meeting. Moderated by the city's John Regan, the meeting gave the public a chance to ask questions about the landfill plan. Most aired complaints and raised questions about the city's decision.
Regan said the meeting was intended to gain additional input and could lead to commissioners changing their plans.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/011108/news_news0111_003.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
No “Root Cause Analysis” Exists for City of St. Augustine’s Illegal Dumping – City Managers Misled the Public at the December 13 Lincolnville Meeting
No “Root Cause Analysis” Exists for City of St. Augustine’s Illegal Dumping – City Managers Misled the Public at the December 13, 2007 Meeting in Lincolnville
St. Augustine Assistant City Manager JOHN REGAN, P.E. told the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association’s December 13, 2007 “Stop the Dump[“ meeting that the City had performed a “root cause analysis” on its illegal dumping,.and why it happened, claiming that the City government had “reorganized” to prevent recurrences.
Well, there are no documents reflecting any root cause analysis. REGAN told me this morning that it was all done in City officials’ heads.
In the scientific communities, they call it “drylabbing” when laboratory results are reported that don’t exist. It can be a crime. It can result in loss of government grants and contracts.
In the engineering profession, at NASA and other installations, they call it “warm fuzzies” when vague assurances are given that something is safe. It has killed fourteen (14) astronauts on two (2) Space Shuttles.
If NASA told the American people it performed a root cause analysis for the explosion of one of its Space Shuttles, we’d demand Grand Jury investigations, resignations and firings if they had no documents on the putative “root cause analysis” and then said they did it “in their heads.”
That’s what happened here.
Is it worse than “drylabbing” or “warm fuzzies” to tell the people of St. Augustine that there has been a “root cause analysis” of how WILLIAM B. HARRISS’ regime committed a crime against nature when there was no “root cause analysis,” but merely thumb-sucking by minions, who know not that they know not that they know not?
City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS – will you kindly come to the meeting in Lincolnville tomorrow and explain yourself, instead of sending your subordinates to tell us about “root cause analysis” that does not exist, and other fables, flummery and dupery? WILLIAM B. HARRISS, you have the right to remain silent -- but we wish you wouldn't.
St. Augustine Assistant City Manager JOHN REGAN, P.E. told the Lincolnville Neighborhood Association’s December 13, 2007 “Stop the Dump[“ meeting that the City had performed a “root cause analysis” on its illegal dumping,.and why it happened, claiming that the City government had “reorganized” to prevent recurrences.
Well, there are no documents reflecting any root cause analysis. REGAN told me this morning that it was all done in City officials’ heads.
In the scientific communities, they call it “drylabbing” when laboratory results are reported that don’t exist. It can be a crime. It can result in loss of government grants and contracts.
In the engineering profession, at NASA and other installations, they call it “warm fuzzies” when vague assurances are given that something is safe. It has killed fourteen (14) astronauts on two (2) Space Shuttles.
If NASA told the American people it performed a root cause analysis for the explosion of one of its Space Shuttles, we’d demand Grand Jury investigations, resignations and firings if they had no documents on the putative “root cause analysis” and then said they did it “in their heads.”
That’s what happened here.
Is it worse than “drylabbing” or “warm fuzzies” to tell the people of St. Augustine that there has been a “root cause analysis” of how WILLIAM B. HARRISS’ regime committed a crime against nature when there was no “root cause analysis,” but merely thumb-sucking by minions, who know not that they know not that they know not?
City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS – will you kindly come to the meeting in Lincolnville tomorrow and explain yourself, instead of sending your subordinates to tell us about “root cause analysis” that does not exist, and other fables, flummery and dupery? WILLIAM B. HARRISS, you have the right to remain silent -- but we wish you wouldn't.
Root cause analysis -- Here's what Wikipedia Says
Root cause analysis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article or section seems to contain embedded lists that may require cleanup.
To meet Wikipedia's style guidelines, please help improve this article by: removing items which are not notable, encyclopedic, or helpful from the list(s); incorporating appropriate items into the main body of the article; and discussing this issue on the talk page.
Root cause analysis (RCA) is a class of problem solving methods aimed at identifying the root causes of problems or events. The practice of RCA is predicated on the belief that problems are best solved by attempting to correct or eliminate root causes, as opposed to merely addressing the immediately obvious symptoms. By directing corrective measures at root causes, it is hoped that the likelihood of problem recurrence will be minimized. However, it is recognized that complete prevention of recurrence by a single intervention is not always possible. Thus, RCA is often considered to be an iterative process, and is frequently viewed as a tool of continuous improvement.
Root cause analysis is not a single, sharply-defined methodology; there are many different tools, processes, and philosophies of RCA in existence. However, most of these can be classed into five, very-broadly defined "schools" that are named here by their basic fields of origin: safety-based, production-based, process-based, failure-based, and systems-based.
Safety-based RCA descends from the fields of accident analysis and occupational safety and health.
Production-based RCA has its origins in the field of quality control for industrial manufacturing.
Process-based RCA is basically a follow-on to production-based RCA, but with a scope that has been expanded to include business processes.
Failure-based RCA is rooted in the practice of failure analysis as employed in engineering and maintenance.
Systems-based RCA has emerged as an amalgamation of the preceding schools, along with ideas taken from fields such as change management, risk management, and systems analysis.
Despite the seeming disparity in purpose and definition among the various schools of root cause analysis, there are some general principles that could be considered as universal. Similarly, it is possible to define a general process for performing RCA.
Contents [hide]
1 General principles of root cause analysis
2 General process for performing and documenting an RCA-based Corrective Action
3 Root cause analysis techniques
4 Basic Elements of Root Cause
5 See also
[edit] General principles of root cause analysis
Aiming corrective measures at root causes is more effective than merely treating the symptoms of a problem.
To be effective, RCA must be performed systematically, and conclusions must be backed up by evidence.
There is usually more than one root cause for any given problem.
[edit] General process for performing and documenting an RCA-based Corrective Action
Notice that RCA (in steps 3, 4 and 5) forms the most critical part of successful corrective action, because it directs the corrective action at the root of the problem.
Define the problem.
Gather data/evidence.
Identify issues that contributed to the problem.
Find root causes.
Develop solution recommendations.
Implement the recommendations.
Observe the recommended solutions to ensure effectiveness.
[edit] Root cause analysis techniques
5 Whys
Failure mode and effects analysis
Pareto analysis
Fault tree analysis
Bayesian inference
Ishikawa diagram, also known as the fishbone diagram or cause and effect diagram
Barrier analysis - a technique often used in particularly in process industries. It is based on tracing energy flows, with a focus on barriers to those flows, to identify how and why the barriers did not prevent the energy flows from causing harm.
Change analysis - an investigation technique often used for problems or accidents. It is based on comparing a situation that does not exhibit the problem to one that does, in order to identify the changes or differences that might explain why the problem occurred.
Causal factor tree analysis - a technique based on displaying causal factors in a tree-structure such that cause-effect dependencies are clearly identified.
Apollo Root Cause Analysis - a wholistic approach in which Problem Definition, Cause and Effect Analysis, Solution Generation, and Effective Solutions are used and identified.
[edit] Basic Elements of Root Cause
Materials
Defective Raw Material
Wrong type for job
Lack of raw material
Machine/Equipment
Incorrect tool selection
Poor maintenance or design
Poor equipment or tool placement
Defective Equipment or tool
Environment
Orderly workplace
Job design or layout of work
Surfaces poorly maintained
Physical demands of the task
Forces of Nature
Management
No or poor management involvement
Inattention to task
Task hazards not guarded properly
Other (horseplay, inattention....)
Stress demands
Methods
No or poor procedures
Practices are not the same as written procedures
Poor communication
Management System
Training or education lacking
Poor employee involvement
Poor recognition of hazard
Previously identified hazards were not eliminated
[edit] See also
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article or section seems to contain embedded lists that may require cleanup.
To meet Wikipedia's style guidelines, please help improve this article by: removing items which are not notable, encyclopedic, or helpful from the list(s); incorporating appropriate items into the main body of the article; and discussing this issue on the talk page.
Root cause analysis (RCA) is a class of problem solving methods aimed at identifying the root causes of problems or events. The practice of RCA is predicated on the belief that problems are best solved by attempting to correct or eliminate root causes, as opposed to merely addressing the immediately obvious symptoms. By directing corrective measures at root causes, it is hoped that the likelihood of problem recurrence will be minimized. However, it is recognized that complete prevention of recurrence by a single intervention is not always possible. Thus, RCA is often considered to be an iterative process, and is frequently viewed as a tool of continuous improvement.
Root cause analysis is not a single, sharply-defined methodology; there are many different tools, processes, and philosophies of RCA in existence. However, most of these can be classed into five, very-broadly defined "schools" that are named here by their basic fields of origin: safety-based, production-based, process-based, failure-based, and systems-based.
Safety-based RCA descends from the fields of accident analysis and occupational safety and health.
Production-based RCA has its origins in the field of quality control for industrial manufacturing.
Process-based RCA is basically a follow-on to production-based RCA, but with a scope that has been expanded to include business processes.
Failure-based RCA is rooted in the practice of failure analysis as employed in engineering and maintenance.
Systems-based RCA has emerged as an amalgamation of the preceding schools, along with ideas taken from fields such as change management, risk management, and systems analysis.
Despite the seeming disparity in purpose and definition among the various schools of root cause analysis, there are some general principles that could be considered as universal. Similarly, it is possible to define a general process for performing RCA.
Contents [hide]
1 General principles of root cause analysis
2 General process for performing and documenting an RCA-based Corrective Action
3 Root cause analysis techniques
4 Basic Elements of Root Cause
5 See also
[edit] General principles of root cause analysis
Aiming corrective measures at root causes is more effective than merely treating the symptoms of a problem.
To be effective, RCA must be performed systematically, and conclusions must be backed up by evidence.
There is usually more than one root cause for any given problem.
[edit] General process for performing and documenting an RCA-based Corrective Action
Notice that RCA (in steps 3, 4 and 5) forms the most critical part of successful corrective action, because it directs the corrective action at the root of the problem.
Define the problem.
Gather data/evidence.
Identify issues that contributed to the problem.
Find root causes.
Develop solution recommendations.
Implement the recommendations.
Observe the recommended solutions to ensure effectiveness.
[edit] Root cause analysis techniques
5 Whys
Failure mode and effects analysis
Pareto analysis
Fault tree analysis
Bayesian inference
Ishikawa diagram, also known as the fishbone diagram or cause and effect diagram
Barrier analysis - a technique often used in particularly in process industries. It is based on tracing energy flows, with a focus on barriers to those flows, to identify how and why the barriers did not prevent the energy flows from causing harm.
Change analysis - an investigation technique often used for problems or accidents. It is based on comparing a situation that does not exhibit the problem to one that does, in order to identify the changes or differences that might explain why the problem occurred.
Causal factor tree analysis - a technique based on displaying causal factors in a tree-structure such that cause-effect dependencies are clearly identified.
Apollo Root Cause Analysis - a wholistic approach in which Problem Definition, Cause and Effect Analysis, Solution Generation, and Effective Solutions are used and identified.
[edit] Basic Elements of Root Cause
Materials
Defective Raw Material
Wrong type for job
Lack of raw material
Machine/Equipment
Incorrect tool selection
Poor maintenance or design
Poor equipment or tool placement
Defective Equipment or tool
Environment
Orderly workplace
Job design or layout of work
Surfaces poorly maintained
Physical demands of the task
Forces of Nature
Management
No or poor management involvement
Inattention to task
Task hazards not guarded properly
Other (horseplay, inattention....)
Stress demands
Methods
No or poor procedures
Practices are not the same as written procedures
Poor communication
Management System
Training or education lacking
Poor employee involvement
Poor recognition of hazard
Previously identified hazards were not eliminated
[edit] See also
Letter: Protect Lincolnville from old dump's waste
Letter: Protect Lincolnville from old dump's waste
Missy Hall
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/09/08
Editor: Arsenic, thallium and vinyl chloride each is a highly toxic substance with well-documented serious effects on the health of people and the environment. Each is reportedly within the contaminated soil, sludge and waste originally moved from a Riberia Street landfill in Lincolnville to a site off Holmes Boulevard. Remarkably, despite evidence of contamination of ground water at the latter site, the city of St. Augustine proposes to move the many tons of contaminated soil, waste, and sludge back to Lincolnville.
Lincolnville, the most populous district within St. Augustine, is a peninsula surrounded on three sides by marshland and two rivers inhabited by a variety of plants, fish and birds. From the perspective of public health and environmental protection, Lincolnville should be the last place considered by the city as a final destination for toxic waste.
We belong to the Lincolnville community and we are concerned about this issue. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Code of Federal Regulations, Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code include specific definitions of hazardous wastes, detailed regulations and restrictions regarding hazardous waste management and hefty fines and other penalties for violation of these federal and state laws. One of our three grown children, a second-year law student at the University of Florida, has prepared a research-based summary of these regulations and their application to the afore-mentioned issue in Lincolnville. We would gladly forward an electronic copy of this document to anyone who requests it via e-mail to jwhall3@phhp.ufl.edu.
We implore officials of the city of St. Augustine to find a suitable solution to the problem of hazardous waste disposal that fully complies with federal and state laws, and is in the best interests of the residents of Lincolnville.
James W. (Jay) Hall III
Missy Hall
St. Augustine
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010908/opinions_010908033.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Missy Hall
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/09/08
Editor: Arsenic, thallium and vinyl chloride each is a highly toxic substance with well-documented serious effects on the health of people and the environment. Each is reportedly within the contaminated soil, sludge and waste originally moved from a Riberia Street landfill in Lincolnville to a site off Holmes Boulevard. Remarkably, despite evidence of contamination of ground water at the latter site, the city of St. Augustine proposes to move the many tons of contaminated soil, waste, and sludge back to Lincolnville.
Lincolnville, the most populous district within St. Augustine, is a peninsula surrounded on three sides by marshland and two rivers inhabited by a variety of plants, fish and birds. From the perspective of public health and environmental protection, Lincolnville should be the last place considered by the city as a final destination for toxic waste.
We belong to the Lincolnville community and we are concerned about this issue. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Code of Federal Regulations, Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code include specific definitions of hazardous wastes, detailed regulations and restrictions regarding hazardous waste management and hefty fines and other penalties for violation of these federal and state laws. One of our three grown children, a second-year law student at the University of Florida, has prepared a research-based summary of these regulations and their application to the afore-mentioned issue in Lincolnville. We would gladly forward an electronic copy of this document to anyone who requests it via e-mail to jwhall3@phhp.ufl.edu.
We implore officials of the city of St. Augustine to find a suitable solution to the problem of hazardous waste disposal that fully complies with federal and state laws, and is in the best interests of the residents of Lincolnville.
James W. (Jay) Hall III
Missy Hall
St. Augustine
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010908/opinions_010908033.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
SUMMARY OF HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS
SUMMARY OF HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS
This summary is to assist hazardous waste handlers in complying with federal and
State of Florida regulations. Most of the following regulations have been in effect since
November 19, 1980. Florida has adopted and incorporated portions of Title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 260-270 and 273 into its Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.) as Chapter 62-730. In some instances, Chapter 62-730, F.A.C., contains more
detail than the CFR as promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Hazardous wastes (HW) are wastes listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D as
hazardous or they are wastes characterized in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C as hazardous
by exhibiting one of four characteristics: ignitability (i.e., an oxidizer or flash point <
140°F), corrosivity (i.e., pH < 2 or > 12.5), reactivity, or toxicity.
A hazardous waste determination must be made of any waste material generated
(§262.11). If the material is hazardous, then it must be recycled, treated, stored, or
disposed at a HW facility authorized by DEP, EPA or another state. HW cannot be
disposed on or in the ground, or in local landfills, septic tanks, or injection wells. Also,
regardless of quantity, the generator of HW is ultimately responsible for the waste from
"cradle to grave", and can be held liable for improper management of HW even though it
may have been sent to an authorized HW management facility using a licensed
transporter authorized by DEP.
Claims that material is not a waste or is exempt from must be documented. [Rule
62-730.030(4), F.A.C.] In addition, generators must keep records of HW generated that
were subsequently managed pursuant to an exclusion. This includes wastes that were
generated, accumulated and then disposed of in a wastewater treatment pretreatment unit
or unit subject to the Clean Water Act.
A copy of the federal hazardous waste regulations (40 CFR Parts 260-268) can be
obtained from public, college or law libraries; EPA Region 4, Atlanta Federal Center, 61
Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 (404/562-8579); the U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402; or the U.S. Government Printing Office, 100
West Bay Street, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32202 (904/353-0569). They are also
available online at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html. Copies of Chapter 62-730,
F.A.C. may be obtained from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) at:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/rules/default.htm.
This handout is based on DEP’s understanding of the HW regulations. It should
be read in conjunction with (and not as a substitute for) the federal and state HW
regulations. This summary includes the principal components of the HW regulations.
Requirements may change because of amendments to the regulations, new interpretations
or guidance from EPA or DEP, judicial rulings, etc.
Ultimately, it is the facility's responsibility to stay current with the HW
regulations and be in compliance with all applicable environmental regulations. Failure to
2
meet the applicable rules may subject facilities to more stringent standards. For example,
small quantity generators (SQGs) dumping HW illegally not only become subject to
disposal facility standards but will also be subject to enforcement actions. DEP has an
agreement with EPA that mandates the assessment of penalties for violations of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements.
Many local governments have regulations and ordinances regarding the
management of hazardous materials and/or wastes. Please check with those agencies for
information on local requirements. New regulations may be adopted by EPA and become
effective in Florida prior to adoption by DEP. For information and copies of new
regulations, go to: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/comments.htm.
LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
As of May 8, 1990, most hazardous wastes must be treated to meet Land Disposal
Restriction (LDR) Universal Treatment Standards (UTS) prior to disposal in permitted
hazardous waste landfills or surface impoundments. The LDR rule prohibits the dilution
of restricted wastes as a substitute for effective adequate treatment.
Before treating a HW or disposing of it off site, the generator must determine
whether the waste is subject to the LDR rules, what hazardous constituent levels are in
the waste, and whether the waste must be treated or already meets the applicable
treatment standard or prohibition level upon generation.
Generators who treat hazardous waste on site in tanks or containers under 40 CFR
§262.34 must develop and follow a written waste analysis plan. The plan must be based
on a detailed chemical and physical analysis of the waste. Records must be kept
documenting treatment. Listed hazardous wastes must still be disposed of at a permitted
hazardous waste landfill after treatment.
For the initial shipment of a HW shipped off site, the generator must notify
treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs) of the nature and hazardous
constituents of each HW shipped. The written generator notice must include:
a) The initial manifest document number and all applicable EPA hazardous waste
number(s) and treatability groups (See 40 CFR §268.40);
b) A list of the hazardous constituents that must be treated;
c) Waste analysis data (if available); and
d) A signed certification if the generator is claiming that his waste already meets
the treatment standard.
All notifications, certifications, and waste analysis data must be kept on-site for at
least three (3) years from the date the waste was last sent to on or off site treatment or
disposal. The generator must submit a new notice if the waste or the receiving
facility changes.
3
The LDR rule provides for a few limited opportunities for delaying the effective
date of prohibition, for a treatability variance, or for gaining an exemption from the
prohibitions. This LDR explanation is a brief synopsis of a complex set of rules and
regulations and is not all inclusive. Contact the EPA or DEP or review 40 CFR Part 268
for detailed information.
USED OIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL GENERATORS - 40 CFR PART 279
1. Used oil may only be stored in tanks or containers.
2. Containers and tanks must be in good condition and not leaking.
3. Containers and tanks must be labeled "Used Oil."
4. Spills must be cleaned up, and contaminated materials disposed of properly.
5. Oil filters may not be disposed of at landfills. They must be recycled by an oil
filter processor or municipal refuse incinerator (Chapter 62-710, F.A.C.).
Used oil must have secondary containment for containers, existing tanks or above
ground tanks.
UNIVERSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR ALL GENERATORS
U.S. EPA’s Universal Waste Rule (40 CFR Part 273) provides an alternative set
of management standards for certain specific wastes in lieu of regulation under 40 CFR
Parts 260 through 272. Currently, it applies to recycling of batteries, some pesticides,
and mercury containing devices and lamps. Facilities that manage these wastes as
Universal Waste (UW) do not need to count that waste toward their generator status or
use hazardous waste manifests for shipping UW. Florida’s Chapter 62-737, F.A.C., is
broader in scope than EPA’s UW Rule and therefore governs the management of
mercury-containing lamps and devices in Florida.
HAZARDOUS WASTE REQUIREMENTS
I. Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) 40 CFR
§ 261.5.
CESQGs generate less than 100 kilograms of HW per month and less than 1
kilogram of acute HW (such as some pesticides, toxins or arsenic and cyanide
compounds) per month. Many wastes that are recycled are included in this
quantity determination.
1. Perform HW determination. [§262.11]
2. Cannot accumulate > 1000 kg at any time. [§261.5(g)(2)]
3. Ensure delivery of HW to a proper recycling facility or TSDF. [§261.5(g)(3)]
4. Keep records documenting proper disposal. [§62-730.030(3) & (4), F.A.C.]
II. Small Quantity Generators (SQG) 40 CFR Part 262.
SQGs generate 100 - 1000 kilograms of HW per month. Many wastes that are
recycled are included in this quantity determination.
1. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID Number (§262.12) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf
4
or phone 850/245- 8707.
2. Use manifest system [unless there is a reclamation agreement pursuant to
§262.20(e)], and ship only to a permitted facility (Part 262, Subpart B).
3. Never exceed the 6000 kg accumulation/180 day storage time limit.
[§262.34(d)(1)]
4. Emergency Planning [§262.34(d)(5)]:
a) Have at least one employee or a designee with authority as Emergency
Coordinator (EC) on 24-hour call.
b) Next to the telephone, post
(i) the EC name and phone number;
(ii) fire department's number; and
(iii) location of fire extinguishers; spill control equipment/material,
and fire alarm (if any).
c) Follow emergency procedures in §262.34(d)(5), including taking
necessary steps to address spills and fires, and notifying the National
Response Center (24-hour number: 800/424-8802) and the State Warning
Point (850/413- 9911).
d) Upon request, the DEP will provide contingency plan guidance if the
facility wishes to develop a more comprehensive emergency plan than
required of SQGs.
5. Training of personnel regarding proper HW handling and emergency response.
[§262.34(d)(5)(iii)]
6. Keep records (§262.44), including manifests, test results, etc., a minimum of
three (3) years.
7. If tanks are used for management of HW, meet the tank requirements of
§265.201. This includes daily and weekly inspections, required maintenance, spill
response and closure standards.
8. Meet the following requirements under III -- LQG Requirements, below:
Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12 to 15, 17, and 22.
9. If a SQG fails to meet applicable requirements, the full generator standards
(and possibly TSDF standards) may apply. [§262.34(f)]
III. Large Quantity Generators (LQG) 40 CFR Part 262.
LQGs generate 1000 kilograms or more of HW per month or 1 kilogram or
more of acute HW (such as some pesticides, toxins or arsenic and cyanide
compounds) per month. Many wastes that are recycled are included in this
quantity determination.
1. Perform HW determination (§262.11), including LDR waste analyses (§268.7).
2. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID number (§262.12) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf
or phone 850/245- 8707.
3. Use manifest system, and ship to a permitted facility (Part 262, Subpart B).
State rules require the generator to complete Items 1 through 15 and the
applicable parts of item 16, if required for international shipments, on Form 8700-
22, and Items 21 through 32, on Form 8700-22A.
5
4. Meet pre-transport requirements for packaging, labeling, marking and
placarding (Part 262, Subpart C).
5. Meet satellite accumulation rules. [§ 262.34(c)] Close and label these
containers.
6. Label containers and tanks with the words "Hazardous Waste" and label
containers with accumulation start dates. [§262.34(a)]
7. Do not store HW > 90 days. [§262.34(b)]
8. Keep all records for at least three (3) years (including manifests, test data,
biennial reports, etc.) (Part 262, Subpart D).
9. File a biennial report for HW shipped off site. (Rule 62-730.160, F.A.C.)
10. File exception report for late or missing manifests from the designated facility.
[§262.42]
11. Meet personnel training requirements, including documentation of training.
[§§264.32(a)(4) & 265.16]
12. Maintain and operate the facility in a clean, safe manner. [§§262.34(a)(4) &
§265.31]
13. Provide emergency equipment [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.32]:
a) telephone or hand-held two-way radio;
b) internal communication or alarm system;
c) fire and spill control equipment (e.g. fire extinguishers, hoses,
sprinklers, etc.);
d) neutralizing agents, spill adsorbents, overpack drums, standby 55-
gallon drums, etc.; and
e) test and maintain the emergency equipment. [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.33]
14. Maintain adequate aisle space for evacuation, inspecting drums, etc., e.g., no
less than three (3) feet. [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.35]
15. Attempt to make arrangements with local fire and police departments,
hospitals, and emergency response contractors/equipment suppliers, with regards
to emergency arrangements, hazards of materials handled, layout of facility, etc.
[§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.37]
16. Have a contingency plan meeting the requirements of Part 265, Subpart D.
[§262.34(a)(4)] Upon request, DEP will provide contingency plan guidance.
Emergencies that require implementation of the contingency plan must be
reported to DEP. Updated contingency plans must be distributed when facility
conditions or emergency coordinators change.
17. Containers (e.g. drums, cans, etc.) must be kept closed and in good condition,
inspected at least weekly, be compatible with the HW stored, and separated from
other incompatible wastes (e.g. keep cyanides away from acids). [§262.34(a)(4) &
Part 265, Subpart I] Records must be kept of these inspections (Rule 62-
730.160, F.A.C.).
18. Ignitable or reactive HW must be stored at least fifty (50) feet from the
facility's boundary line. [§262.34(a)(4) & Part 265, Subpart I]
19. Tanks must meet the requirements of Part 265, Subpart J [§262.34(a)(1)(ii)]
(structural integrity; containment and detection of releases; inspections; response
to leaks or spills; operating requirements; closure and post-closure care; special
6
requirements for ignitable, reactive and/or incompatible wastes; waste analysis
and trial tests).
20. Special cautions (including "no smoking" signs) are required for ignitable or
reactive wastes (§265.17).
21. Security (e.g. a locked fence) and bermed containment areas (with roof and
impermeable floor) for HW storage areas are strongly recommended.
22. A Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Certification or Notification must
accompany the initial manifest for a restricted waste. Generators who treat waste
to meet land disposal restrictions must submit a waste analysis plan to DEP
(§268.7).
23. Meet applicable air emission standards under 40 CFR Part 265, Subparts AA,
BB and CC. [§§262.34(a)(1)]
It is the facility's responsibility to comply with other applicable laws, such as
Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) worker safety and
protective clothing rules; fire codes; Florida's Right to Know Law;
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA); etc.
Hazardous waste may never be disposed of in septic tanks or on the ground.
Hazardous waste may only be burned in permitted hazardous waste
incinerators. Do not dispose of hazardous waste by evaporation.
IV. Transporters (40 CFR Part 263) (62-730, F.A.C).
1. Obtain ID number (§263.11) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf or phone 850/245- 8707.
2. Use manifest system (Part 263, Subpart B).
3. Ability to clean up hazardous waste discharges during transportation-related
incidents (Part 263, Subpart C).
4. Provide annual documentation of financial responsibility. (Rule 62-730.170,
F.A.C.)
5. Submit annual status update to DEP. (Rule 62-730.170, F.A.C.)
6. Transporters storing waste > 24 hours at a transfer facility must notify DEP and
meet many TSDF requirements (Rule 62-730.171, F.A.C.), including
containment, operating record, contingency plan, training, security, and closure.
7. All transfer facilities operated in the state must have a unique ID number. (Rule
62- 730.171, F.A.C.)
8. Transfer facilities must submit closure plan and contingency plan to DEP.
(Rule 62- 730.171, F.A.C.)
9. Transfer facilities must maintain a written record of when all hazardous waste
enters and leaves the facility. (Rule 62-730.171, F.A.C.)
Florida's hazardous waste regulations for transporters and transfer facilities
are more comprehensive than the federal regulations.
7
V. Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) (40 CFR Part 264
or Part 265).
1. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID number (§264.11) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf.
2. Obtain a HW permit unless exempt (e.g. wastewater treatment units,
elementary neutralization, etc.) and comply with permit conditions. Facilities
receiving HW from off-site (including some recycling facilities) may be subject to
TSDF requirements.
3. Must meet applicable generator standards (III, above).
4. Comply with general facility standards, including waste analyses, security,
inspections, and personnel training (Part 264, Subpart B).
5. Maintain emergency equipment, adequate aisle space, and make arrangements
with local authorities (Part 264, Subpart C).
6. Have a contingency plan meeting the requirements of Part 264, Subpart D.
7. Use manifest system and comply with recordkeeping requirements (Part 264,
Subpart E).
8. Comply with groundwater monitoring requirements (Part 264, Subpart F).
9. Comply with closure and post-closure requirements (Part 264, Subpart G).
10. Maintain financial assurance for closure, post closure (if applicable) and
liability (Part 264, Subpart H).
11. Comply with container management standards (Part 264, Subpart I).
12. Comply with tank management standards (Part 264, Subpart J).
13. Comply with additional requirements for individual units such as surface
impoundments, waste piles, containment buildings, incinerators, drip pads, etc.
(Part 264, Subpart K – Part 264, Subpart DD).
14. Meet applicable air emission standards (Part 264, Subparts AA, BB, and CC).
15. Meet applicable LDR requirements for treatment facilities, or as generators
for wastes sent off site for further treatment (Part 268).
VI. Manifest Forms
Title 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart B requires the use of the Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest (EPA Form 8700-22 and 8700-22a) for hazardous waste
shipments. Florida adopted 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart B by reference in Rule 62-
730.160(1), F.A.C.
Obtaining Manifest Forms
Florida does not supply manifests, but does supply a list of vendors from which
copies of the manifest may be obtained. Copies may also be available from
hazardous waste transporters or hazardous waste management facilities.
Manifest Copies
40 CFR 262.22 requires the manifest to consist of a copy for:
8
1. the generator;
2. each transporter;
3. the owner/operator of the designated facility; and
4. a signed copy to be returned to the generator by the designated facility.
For regular shipments of hazardous waste, Florida does not require the submission
of a manifest copy to DEP. However, manifests must be retained for three (3)
years and are reviewed as part of hazardous waste compliance inspections
conducted by DEP.
When hazardous wastes are shipped under an emergency EPA/DEP identification
number, as defined in Rule 62-730.161, F.A.C., the generator must send a legible
copy of all signed and returned manifests to DEP within 45 days of the last
shipment.
The owner/operator of a designated facility must submit to DEP any manifests for
which a significant discrepancy is discovered, as defined in 40 CFR 264.72 and
40 CFR 265.72, if the discrepancy is not resolved within 15 days.
A large quantity generator must submit a legible copy of a manifest to DEP if he
has not received a copy of the signed manifest from the designated facility within
45 days of shipment. A small quantity generator must submit a legible copy of a
manifest to DEP if the signed manifest is not received from the designated facility
within 60 days of shipment.
Completing the Manifest
Florida requires [Rule 62-730.160(1), F.A.C.] the completion of the following
sections of the manifest in accordance with Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 262.
Waste codes are listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subparts C and D.
Form 8700-22
Items 1 – 15
Applicable parts of Item 16, if required for international shipments
Form 8700-22a
Items 21-
This summary is to assist hazardous waste handlers in complying with federal and
State of Florida regulations. Most of the following regulations have been in effect since
November 19, 1980. Florida has adopted and incorporated portions of Title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 260-270 and 273 into its Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.) as Chapter 62-730. In some instances, Chapter 62-730, F.A.C., contains more
detail than the CFR as promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Hazardous wastes (HW) are wastes listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D as
hazardous or they are wastes characterized in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C as hazardous
by exhibiting one of four characteristics: ignitability (i.e., an oxidizer or flash point <
140°F), corrosivity (i.e., pH < 2 or > 12.5), reactivity, or toxicity.
A hazardous waste determination must be made of any waste material generated
(§262.11). If the material is hazardous, then it must be recycled, treated, stored, or
disposed at a HW facility authorized by DEP, EPA or another state. HW cannot be
disposed on or in the ground, or in local landfills, septic tanks, or injection wells. Also,
regardless of quantity, the generator of HW is ultimately responsible for the waste from
"cradle to grave", and can be held liable for improper management of HW even though it
may have been sent to an authorized HW management facility using a licensed
transporter authorized by DEP.
Claims that material is not a waste or is exempt from must be documented. [Rule
62-730.030(4), F.A.C.] In addition, generators must keep records of HW generated that
were subsequently managed pursuant to an exclusion. This includes wastes that were
generated, accumulated and then disposed of in a wastewater treatment pretreatment unit
or unit subject to the Clean Water Act.
A copy of the federal hazardous waste regulations (40 CFR Parts 260-268) can be
obtained from public, college or law libraries; EPA Region 4, Atlanta Federal Center, 61
Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 (404/562-8579); the U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402; or the U.S. Government Printing Office, 100
West Bay Street, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32202 (904/353-0569). They are also
available online at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html. Copies of Chapter 62-730,
F.A.C. may be obtained from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) at:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/rules/default.htm.
This handout is based on DEP’s understanding of the HW regulations. It should
be read in conjunction with (and not as a substitute for) the federal and state HW
regulations. This summary includes the principal components of the HW regulations.
Requirements may change because of amendments to the regulations, new interpretations
or guidance from EPA or DEP, judicial rulings, etc.
Ultimately, it is the facility's responsibility to stay current with the HW
regulations and be in compliance with all applicable environmental regulations. Failure to
2
meet the applicable rules may subject facilities to more stringent standards. For example,
small quantity generators (SQGs) dumping HW illegally not only become subject to
disposal facility standards but will also be subject to enforcement actions. DEP has an
agreement with EPA that mandates the assessment of penalties for violations of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements.
Many local governments have regulations and ordinances regarding the
management of hazardous materials and/or wastes. Please check with those agencies for
information on local requirements. New regulations may be adopted by EPA and become
effective in Florida prior to adoption by DEP. For information and copies of new
regulations, go to: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/comments.htm.
LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
As of May 8, 1990, most hazardous wastes must be treated to meet Land Disposal
Restriction (LDR) Universal Treatment Standards (UTS) prior to disposal in permitted
hazardous waste landfills or surface impoundments. The LDR rule prohibits the dilution
of restricted wastes as a substitute for effective adequate treatment.
Before treating a HW or disposing of it off site, the generator must determine
whether the waste is subject to the LDR rules, what hazardous constituent levels are in
the waste, and whether the waste must be treated or already meets the applicable
treatment standard or prohibition level upon generation.
Generators who treat hazardous waste on site in tanks or containers under 40 CFR
§262.34 must develop and follow a written waste analysis plan. The plan must be based
on a detailed chemical and physical analysis of the waste. Records must be kept
documenting treatment. Listed hazardous wastes must still be disposed of at a permitted
hazardous waste landfill after treatment.
For the initial shipment of a HW shipped off site, the generator must notify
treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs) of the nature and hazardous
constituents of each HW shipped. The written generator notice must include:
a) The initial manifest document number and all applicable EPA hazardous waste
number(s) and treatability groups (See 40 CFR §268.40);
b) A list of the hazardous constituents that must be treated;
c) Waste analysis data (if available); and
d) A signed certification if the generator is claiming that his waste already meets
the treatment standard.
All notifications, certifications, and waste analysis data must be kept on-site for at
least three (3) years from the date the waste was last sent to on or off site treatment or
disposal. The generator must submit a new notice if the waste or the receiving
facility changes.
3
The LDR rule provides for a few limited opportunities for delaying the effective
date of prohibition, for a treatability variance, or for gaining an exemption from the
prohibitions. This LDR explanation is a brief synopsis of a complex set of rules and
regulations and is not all inclusive. Contact the EPA or DEP or review 40 CFR Part 268
for detailed information.
USED OIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL GENERATORS - 40 CFR PART 279
1. Used oil may only be stored in tanks or containers.
2. Containers and tanks must be in good condition and not leaking.
3. Containers and tanks must be labeled "Used Oil."
4. Spills must be cleaned up, and contaminated materials disposed of properly.
5. Oil filters may not be disposed of at landfills. They must be recycled by an oil
filter processor or municipal refuse incinerator (Chapter 62-710, F.A.C.).
Used oil must have secondary containment for containers, existing tanks or above
ground tanks.
UNIVERSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR ALL GENERATORS
U.S. EPA’s Universal Waste Rule (40 CFR Part 273) provides an alternative set
of management standards for certain specific wastes in lieu of regulation under 40 CFR
Parts 260 through 272. Currently, it applies to recycling of batteries, some pesticides,
and mercury containing devices and lamps. Facilities that manage these wastes as
Universal Waste (UW) do not need to count that waste toward their generator status or
use hazardous waste manifests for shipping UW. Florida’s Chapter 62-737, F.A.C., is
broader in scope than EPA’s UW Rule and therefore governs the management of
mercury-containing lamps and devices in Florida.
HAZARDOUS WASTE REQUIREMENTS
I. Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) 40 CFR
§ 261.5.
CESQGs generate less than 100 kilograms of HW per month and less than 1
kilogram of acute HW (such as some pesticides, toxins or arsenic and cyanide
compounds) per month. Many wastes that are recycled are included in this
quantity determination.
1. Perform HW determination. [§262.11]
2. Cannot accumulate > 1000 kg at any time. [§261.5(g)(2)]
3. Ensure delivery of HW to a proper recycling facility or TSDF. [§261.5(g)(3)]
4. Keep records documenting proper disposal. [§62-730.030(3) & (4), F.A.C.]
II. Small Quantity Generators (SQG) 40 CFR Part 262.
SQGs generate 100 - 1000 kilograms of HW per month. Many wastes that are
recycled are included in this quantity determination.
1. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID Number (§262.12) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf
4
or phone 850/245- 8707.
2. Use manifest system [unless there is a reclamation agreement pursuant to
§262.20(e)], and ship only to a permitted facility (Part 262, Subpart B).
3. Never exceed the 6000 kg accumulation/180 day storage time limit.
[§262.34(d)(1)]
4. Emergency Planning [§262.34(d)(5)]:
a) Have at least one employee or a designee with authority as Emergency
Coordinator (EC) on 24-hour call.
b) Next to the telephone, post
(i) the EC name and phone number;
(ii) fire department's number; and
(iii) location of fire extinguishers; spill control equipment/material,
and fire alarm (if any).
c) Follow emergency procedures in §262.34(d)(5), including taking
necessary steps to address spills and fires, and notifying the National
Response Center (24-hour number: 800/424-8802) and the State Warning
Point (850/413- 9911).
d) Upon request, the DEP will provide contingency plan guidance if the
facility wishes to develop a more comprehensive emergency plan than
required of SQGs.
5. Training of personnel regarding proper HW handling and emergency response.
[§262.34(d)(5)(iii)]
6. Keep records (§262.44), including manifests, test results, etc., a minimum of
three (3) years.
7. If tanks are used for management of HW, meet the tank requirements of
§265.201. This includes daily and weekly inspections, required maintenance, spill
response and closure standards.
8. Meet the following requirements under III -- LQG Requirements, below:
Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12 to 15, 17, and 22.
9. If a SQG fails to meet applicable requirements, the full generator standards
(and possibly TSDF standards) may apply. [§262.34(f)]
III. Large Quantity Generators (LQG) 40 CFR Part 262.
LQGs generate 1000 kilograms or more of HW per month or 1 kilogram or
more of acute HW (such as some pesticides, toxins or arsenic and cyanide
compounds) per month. Many wastes that are recycled are included in this
quantity determination.
1. Perform HW determination (§262.11), including LDR waste analyses (§268.7).
2. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID number (§262.12) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf
or phone 850/245- 8707.
3. Use manifest system, and ship to a permitted facility (Part 262, Subpart B).
State rules require the generator to complete Items 1 through 15 and the
applicable parts of item 16, if required for international shipments, on Form 8700-
22, and Items 21 through 32, on Form 8700-22A.
5
4. Meet pre-transport requirements for packaging, labeling, marking and
placarding (Part 262, Subpart C).
5. Meet satellite accumulation rules. [§ 262.34(c)] Close and label these
containers.
6. Label containers and tanks with the words "Hazardous Waste" and label
containers with accumulation start dates. [§262.34(a)]
7. Do not store HW > 90 days. [§262.34(b)]
8. Keep all records for at least three (3) years (including manifests, test data,
biennial reports, etc.) (Part 262, Subpart D).
9. File a biennial report for HW shipped off site. (Rule 62-730.160, F.A.C.)
10. File exception report for late or missing manifests from the designated facility.
[§262.42]
11. Meet personnel training requirements, including documentation of training.
[§§264.32(a)(4) & 265.16]
12. Maintain and operate the facility in a clean, safe manner. [§§262.34(a)(4) &
§265.31]
13. Provide emergency equipment [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.32]:
a) telephone or hand-held two-way radio;
b) internal communication or alarm system;
c) fire and spill control equipment (e.g. fire extinguishers, hoses,
sprinklers, etc.);
d) neutralizing agents, spill adsorbents, overpack drums, standby 55-
gallon drums, etc.; and
e) test and maintain the emergency equipment. [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.33]
14. Maintain adequate aisle space for evacuation, inspecting drums, etc., e.g., no
less than three (3) feet. [§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.35]
15. Attempt to make arrangements with local fire and police departments,
hospitals, and emergency response contractors/equipment suppliers, with regards
to emergency arrangements, hazards of materials handled, layout of facility, etc.
[§§262.34(a)(4) & 265.37]
16. Have a contingency plan meeting the requirements of Part 265, Subpart D.
[§262.34(a)(4)] Upon request, DEP will provide contingency plan guidance.
Emergencies that require implementation of the contingency plan must be
reported to DEP. Updated contingency plans must be distributed when facility
conditions or emergency coordinators change.
17. Containers (e.g. drums, cans, etc.) must be kept closed and in good condition,
inspected at least weekly, be compatible with the HW stored, and separated from
other incompatible wastes (e.g. keep cyanides away from acids). [§262.34(a)(4) &
Part 265, Subpart I] Records must be kept of these inspections (Rule 62-
730.160, F.A.C.).
18. Ignitable or reactive HW must be stored at least fifty (50) feet from the
facility's boundary line. [§262.34(a)(4) & Part 265, Subpart I]
19. Tanks must meet the requirements of Part 265, Subpart J [§262.34(a)(1)(ii)]
(structural integrity; containment and detection of releases; inspections; response
to leaks or spills; operating requirements; closure and post-closure care; special
6
requirements for ignitable, reactive and/or incompatible wastes; waste analysis
and trial tests).
20. Special cautions (including "no smoking" signs) are required for ignitable or
reactive wastes (§265.17).
21. Security (e.g. a locked fence) and bermed containment areas (with roof and
impermeable floor) for HW storage areas are strongly recommended.
22. A Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Certification or Notification must
accompany the initial manifest for a restricted waste. Generators who treat waste
to meet land disposal restrictions must submit a waste analysis plan to DEP
(§268.7).
23. Meet applicable air emission standards under 40 CFR Part 265, Subparts AA,
BB and CC. [§§262.34(a)(1)]
It is the facility's responsibility to comply with other applicable laws, such as
Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) worker safety and
protective clothing rules; fire codes; Florida's Right to Know Law;
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA); etc.
Hazardous waste may never be disposed of in septic tanks or on the ground.
Hazardous waste may only be burned in permitted hazardous waste
incinerators. Do not dispose of hazardous waste by evaporation.
IV. Transporters (40 CFR Part 263) (62-730, F.A.C).
1. Obtain ID number (§263.11) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf or phone 850/245- 8707.
2. Use manifest system (Part 263, Subpart B).
3. Ability to clean up hazardous waste discharges during transportation-related
incidents (Part 263, Subpart C).
4. Provide annual documentation of financial responsibility. (Rule 62-730.170,
F.A.C.)
5. Submit annual status update to DEP. (Rule 62-730.170, F.A.C.)
6. Transporters storing waste > 24 hours at a transfer facility must notify DEP and
meet many TSDF requirements (Rule 62-730.171, F.A.C.), including
containment, operating record, contingency plan, training, security, and closure.
7. All transfer facilities operated in the state must have a unique ID number. (Rule
62- 730.171, F.A.C.)
8. Transfer facilities must submit closure plan and contingency plan to DEP.
(Rule 62- 730.171, F.A.C.)
9. Transfer facilities must maintain a written record of when all hazardous waste
enters and leaves the facility. (Rule 62-730.171, F.A.C.)
Florida's hazardous waste regulations for transporters and transfer facilities
are more comprehensive than the federal regulations.
7
V. Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) (40 CFR Part 264
or Part 265).
1. Obtain a DEP/EPA ID number (§264.11) at
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/forms/documents/62-
730/730_1b.pdf.
2. Obtain a HW permit unless exempt (e.g. wastewater treatment units,
elementary neutralization, etc.) and comply with permit conditions. Facilities
receiving HW from off-site (including some recycling facilities) may be subject to
TSDF requirements.
3. Must meet applicable generator standards (III, above).
4. Comply with general facility standards, including waste analyses, security,
inspections, and personnel training (Part 264, Subpart B).
5. Maintain emergency equipment, adequate aisle space, and make arrangements
with local authorities (Part 264, Subpart C).
6. Have a contingency plan meeting the requirements of Part 264, Subpart D.
7. Use manifest system and comply with recordkeeping requirements (Part 264,
Subpart E).
8. Comply with groundwater monitoring requirements (Part 264, Subpart F).
9. Comply with closure and post-closure requirements (Part 264, Subpart G).
10. Maintain financial assurance for closure, post closure (if applicable) and
liability (Part 264, Subpart H).
11. Comply with container management standards (Part 264, Subpart I).
12. Comply with tank management standards (Part 264, Subpart J).
13. Comply with additional requirements for individual units such as surface
impoundments, waste piles, containment buildings, incinerators, drip pads, etc.
(Part 264, Subpart K – Part 264, Subpart DD).
14. Meet applicable air emission standards (Part 264, Subparts AA, BB, and CC).
15. Meet applicable LDR requirements for treatment facilities, or as generators
for wastes sent off site for further treatment (Part 268).
VI. Manifest Forms
Title 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart B requires the use of the Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest (EPA Form 8700-22 and 8700-22a) for hazardous waste
shipments. Florida adopted 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart B by reference in Rule 62-
730.160(1), F.A.C.
Obtaining Manifest Forms
Florida does not supply manifests, but does supply a list of vendors from which
copies of the manifest may be obtained. Copies may also be available from
hazardous waste transporters or hazardous waste management facilities.
Manifest Copies
40 CFR 262.22 requires the manifest to consist of a copy for:
8
1. the generator;
2. each transporter;
3. the owner/operator of the designated facility; and
4. a signed copy to be returned to the generator by the designated facility.
For regular shipments of hazardous waste, Florida does not require the submission
of a manifest copy to DEP. However, manifests must be retained for three (3)
years and are reviewed as part of hazardous waste compliance inspections
conducted by DEP.
When hazardous wastes are shipped under an emergency EPA/DEP identification
number, as defined in Rule 62-730.161, F.A.C., the generator must send a legible
copy of all signed and returned manifests to DEP within 45 days of the last
shipment.
The owner/operator of a designated facility must submit to DEP any manifests for
which a significant discrepancy is discovered, as defined in 40 CFR 264.72 and
40 CFR 265.72, if the discrepancy is not resolved within 15 days.
A large quantity generator must submit a legible copy of a manifest to DEP if he
has not received a copy of the signed manifest from the designated facility within
45 days of shipment. A small quantity generator must submit a legible copy of a
manifest to DEP if the signed manifest is not received from the designated facility
within 60 days of shipment.
Completing the Manifest
Florida requires [Rule 62-730.160(1), F.A.C.] the completion of the following
sections of the manifest in accordance with Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 262.
Waste codes are listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subparts C and D.
Form 8700-22
Items 1 – 15
Applicable parts of Item 16, if required for international shipments
Form 8700-22a
Items 21-
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Three wonderful victories begin 2008
Three wonderful victories begin 2008
Three wonderful victories began the New Year. See below.
First, St. Augustine City Planning and Zoning Board (PZB) voted to reject a 1-2 million cubic foot boat warehouse for Lincolnville, which would have blocked the sunsets and inflicted harm on an already dumped-on low-income and African American neighborhood.
Second, the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency (PZA) rejected a massive nursing home.
Third, the SJC PZA rejected a massive equestrian development.
That was all before the New Year was one week old.
In each instance, city and county zoning board members have finally listened to the people, instead of oleaginous speculators (like Robert Michael Graubard and cronies).
Thank you.
Here in our Nation’s Oldest City, what RFK, Sr. called the “willful, heedless destruction of natural beauty and pleasures” must end – “it is not enough to allow dissent, we must demand it, for there is much to dissent from.”
Environmental racism and injustice must end.
Abuse of Lincolnville and West Augustine must end.
No toxicants will ever be taken back to Lincolnville.
All of the city’s illegal dumps must be cleaned up under the supervision, suzerainty and expertise of the EPA -- not a consulting company (GEOSYNTEC) hand-picked by the City’s law firm’s (AKERMAN SENTERFITT) -- a hand-picked litigation consultant, which has delayed a solution for almost two years while previously claiming Florida was too "conservatie" in regulating pollution.
The City of St. Augustine was called “the most lawless city in America” by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1964.
Now, almost 44 years later, it is time for change.
This is our time. This is our town. Those who have contempt for democracy and our environment must answer. That includes City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who must answer questions under oath.
Come to the meeting at St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church, 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. starting at 6 PM Thursday, January 10, 2008.
Ask questions.
Demand answers.
Like any good diplomats, we won’t take no for an answer. Come early. Stay late.
Let the healing begin.
Three wonderful victories began the New Year. See below.
First, St. Augustine City Planning and Zoning Board (PZB) voted to reject a 1-2 million cubic foot boat warehouse for Lincolnville, which would have blocked the sunsets and inflicted harm on an already dumped-on low-income and African American neighborhood.
Second, the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency (PZA) rejected a massive nursing home.
Third, the SJC PZA rejected a massive equestrian development.
That was all before the New Year was one week old.
In each instance, city and county zoning board members have finally listened to the people, instead of oleaginous speculators (like Robert Michael Graubard and cronies).
Thank you.
Here in our Nation’s Oldest City, what RFK, Sr. called the “willful, heedless destruction of natural beauty and pleasures” must end – “it is not enough to allow dissent, we must demand it, for there is much to dissent from.”
Environmental racism and injustice must end.
Abuse of Lincolnville and West Augustine must end.
No toxicants will ever be taken back to Lincolnville.
All of the city’s illegal dumps must be cleaned up under the supervision, suzerainty and expertise of the EPA -- not a consulting company (GEOSYNTEC) hand-picked by the City’s law firm’s (AKERMAN SENTERFITT) -- a hand-picked litigation consultant, which has delayed a solution for almost two years while previously claiming Florida was too "conservatie" in regulating pollution.
The City of St. Augustine was called “the most lawless city in America” by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1964.
Now, almost 44 years later, it is time for change.
This is our time. This is our town. Those who have contempt for democracy and our environment must answer. That includes City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who must answer questions under oath.
Come to the meeting at St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church, 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. starting at 6 PM Thursday, January 10, 2008.
Ask questions.
Demand answers.
Like any good diplomats, we won’t take no for an answer. Come early. Stay late.
Let the healing begin.
Proposed Agenda for January 10, 2008 Meeting in Lincolnville on City's Illegal Dum in Lincolnville and West Augustine
AGENDA
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (sic) MEETING
Riberia Street/Holmes Boulevard Environmental Mitigation Project
Thursday, January 10, 2008, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
St. Paul’s AME Church
85 M.L. King Street, St. Augustine
1. Welcome/ Introductions
2. Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Statement regarding meeting Participation (sic)
3. City of St. Augustine, John Regan, P.E.
a. Historical review, William L. Pence, Esq., Akerman Senterfitt, P.A.
b. Project overview, William L. Pence, Esq., Akerman Senterfitt, P.A.
c. Environmental Results, Nandra D. Weeks, P.E., Geosyntec
d. Alternatives studied and Concluding remarks, John P. Regan, P.E., City of St. Augustine
4. Lincolnville Neighborhood Association Statement (sic)
5. Public Comments and questions.
6. Meeting end – 8:00 pm
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (sic) MEETING
Riberia Street/Holmes Boulevard Environmental Mitigation Project
Thursday, January 10, 2008, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
St. Paul’s AME Church
85 M.L. King Street, St. Augustine
1. Welcome/ Introductions
2. Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Statement regarding meeting Participation (sic)
3. City of St. Augustine, John Regan, P.E.
a. Historical review, William L. Pence, Esq., Akerman Senterfitt, P.A.
b. Project overview, William L. Pence, Esq., Akerman Senterfitt, P.A.
c. Environmental Results, Nandra D. Weeks, P.E., Geosyntec
d. Alternatives studied and Concluding remarks, John P. Regan, P.E., City of St. Augustine
4. Lincolnville Neighborhood Association Statement (sic)
5. Public Comments and questions.
6. Meeting end – 8:00 pm
Monday, January 07, 2008
City sophists at it again --
City sophists at it again --
We still don’t have the agenda for our City’s and and state’s portions of Thursday night’s meeting at 6 PM at the St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church in Lincolnville at 85 Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
The City’s defense lawyers are left sputtering as a result of two pounds of paperwork that seven local residents served on our City of St. Augustine and FDEP on December 27 and 31, 2007.
Our City government has not exactly been forthcoming.
It has lied to, insulted, and mocked questioners. Every time we’ve asked questions in City Commission meetings, there’s laughter from City apparatchiks at the back of the Commission meeting room – and smirks from smug City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who apparently thinks it’s funny. We don’t find it funny that our Florida Aquifer and groundwater are threatened by 35,000 cubic yards of illegal dumping into the Old City Reservoir, a place with pure water, where ten pound bass have been caught, which former EPA Region 4 Regional Administrator John Henry Hankinson has called “an open sore going right down to the aquifer and the groundwater.”
Egged on by the AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm, FDEP has perpetrated a coverup of major proportions, first refusing to prosecute environmental crimes based upon such non sequiturs as our City sending two professional engineers (John Regan and Bob Leetch) to “training,” which is to say a three day seminar in Marco Island, Florida July 19-21, 2006, presented by the Florida Chamber of Commerce. Then FDEP delayed the news of the fine until after the November 2006 election. Then FDEP knuckled under to AKERMAN SENTERFITT in secret dealmaking allowing the contaminated material to be brought back to Lincolnville.
WILLIAM B. HARRISS, the City of St. Augustine City Manager and other officials responsible for the dumping must be held personally liable, with a Grand Jury to consider criminal indictments and a final FDEP order to pay fines out of their own pockets, instead of with our money.
FDEP and City officials impudently act like they’re doing the public a favor by shipping solid waste back to Lincolnville, with the airy notion of creating a “park.”
We’re still waiting on answers to questions we asked in 2006 and 2007.
We’re still appalled that St. Augustine burghers (like the tobacco company) “would rather fight than switch.”
Now the City of St. Augustine and the Florida DEP are spinning sophistry spiderwebs, starting with their claim that concerned citizens have “stymied’ the City’s plan to bring the waste back to Lincolnville for 150 days. We’ve asked for a March 10, 2008 trial date.
Assistant City Manager John Regan – the “heyboy” for City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS – actually told the St. Augustine Record that “Outside from a few individuals, we’re not hearing from the public on this…”
(see story below) Oh, please.
Citizens were invited to speak at the November 13, 2007 meeting by St. Augustine Record editorial of November 11th. The City of St. Augustine Commissioners who bothered to attend heard from no one before voting the controversial Consent Order.
Every measure of public opinion indicates that people are furious, including some 80 citizens who attended the meeting at the St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church December 13th.
When City Hall treats citizens disrespectfully, threatening arrests, removing public comment opportunities and generally acting like maniacal monomaniacs, even removing one resident from the City boundaries, we’re facing a dictatorship, one with contempt for democracy and nature.
The solid waste in the Old City Reservoir must be removed to a Class I landfill, as FDEP ordered March 15, 2006. It is the City that has “stymied” cleanup, not people who reject FDEP’s taking a dive on this one. It is the City and the AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm that have refused to comply with FDEP’s orders, with the City’s negotiating position revealed in a City document (Petitioners’ Exhibit PX-1) that “Under no circumstances, except for a final non-appealable court order, will the City agree to remove the fill material in a Class I landfill.”
Perhaps City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS will deign to attend the January 10, 2007 meeting and answer questions. Doubt it – he’s too busy shredding the Constitution.
One of the likely questioners Thursday night will be my friend, Dee Lovell, a former editor of the Baltimore Sun, former columnist for the Washington Post and longtime companion of the late Pulitzer Prize winning Washington Post political cartoonist Herblock (Herbert Block). See Dee’s column below. See you Thursday a6 6PM at the St. Paul's A.M.E. Church at 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. in Lincolnville.
We still don’t have the agenda for our City’s and and state’s portions of Thursday night’s meeting at 6 PM at the St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church in Lincolnville at 85 Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
The City’s defense lawyers are left sputtering as a result of two pounds of paperwork that seven local residents served on our City of St. Augustine and FDEP on December 27 and 31, 2007.
Our City government has not exactly been forthcoming.
It has lied to, insulted, and mocked questioners. Every time we’ve asked questions in City Commission meetings, there’s laughter from City apparatchiks at the back of the Commission meeting room – and smirks from smug City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS, who apparently thinks it’s funny. We don’t find it funny that our Florida Aquifer and groundwater are threatened by 35,000 cubic yards of illegal dumping into the Old City Reservoir, a place with pure water, where ten pound bass have been caught, which former EPA Region 4 Regional Administrator John Henry Hankinson has called “an open sore going right down to the aquifer and the groundwater.”
Egged on by the AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm, FDEP has perpetrated a coverup of major proportions, first refusing to prosecute environmental crimes based upon such non sequiturs as our City sending two professional engineers (John Regan and Bob Leetch) to “training,” which is to say a three day seminar in Marco Island, Florida July 19-21, 2006, presented by the Florida Chamber of Commerce. Then FDEP delayed the news of the fine until after the November 2006 election. Then FDEP knuckled under to AKERMAN SENTERFITT in secret dealmaking allowing the contaminated material to be brought back to Lincolnville.
WILLIAM B. HARRISS, the City of St. Augustine City Manager and other officials responsible for the dumping must be held personally liable, with a Grand Jury to consider criminal indictments and a final FDEP order to pay fines out of their own pockets, instead of with our money.
FDEP and City officials impudently act like they’re doing the public a favor by shipping solid waste back to Lincolnville, with the airy notion of creating a “park.”
We’re still waiting on answers to questions we asked in 2006 and 2007.
We’re still appalled that St. Augustine burghers (like the tobacco company) “would rather fight than switch.”
Now the City of St. Augustine and the Florida DEP are spinning sophistry spiderwebs, starting with their claim that concerned citizens have “stymied’ the City’s plan to bring the waste back to Lincolnville for 150 days. We’ve asked for a March 10, 2008 trial date.
Assistant City Manager John Regan – the “heyboy” for City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS – actually told the St. Augustine Record that “Outside from a few individuals, we’re not hearing from the public on this…”
(see story below) Oh, please.
Citizens were invited to speak at the November 13, 2007 meeting by St. Augustine Record editorial of November 11th. The City of St. Augustine Commissioners who bothered to attend heard from no one before voting the controversial Consent Order.
Every measure of public opinion indicates that people are furious, including some 80 citizens who attended the meeting at the St. Paul’s A.M.E. Church December 13th.
When City Hall treats citizens disrespectfully, threatening arrests, removing public comment opportunities and generally acting like maniacal monomaniacs, even removing one resident from the City boundaries, we’re facing a dictatorship, one with contempt for democracy and nature.
The solid waste in the Old City Reservoir must be removed to a Class I landfill, as FDEP ordered March 15, 2006. It is the City that has “stymied” cleanup, not people who reject FDEP’s taking a dive on this one. It is the City and the AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm that have refused to comply with FDEP’s orders, with the City’s negotiating position revealed in a City document (Petitioners’ Exhibit PX-1) that “Under no circumstances, except for a final non-appealable court order, will the City agree to remove the fill material in a Class I landfill.”
Perhaps City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS will deign to attend the January 10, 2007 meeting and answer questions. Doubt it – he’s too busy shredding the Constitution.
One of the likely questioners Thursday night will be my friend, Dee Lovell, a former editor of the Baltimore Sun, former columnist for the Washington Post and longtime companion of the late Pulitzer Prize winning Washington Post political cartoonist Herblock (Herbert Block). See Dee’s column below. See you Thursday a6 6PM at the St. Paul's A.M.E. Church at 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. in Lincolnville.
Guest Column: People should attend illegal dumping meeting
Guest Column: People should attend illegal dumping meeting
DEE LOVELL
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/05/08
It's the start of a brand new year. It's also a good time for city and county elected officials to begin a better era in which their government actions take better heed of the wishes and needs of their constituencies. To paraphrase Republican Gov.Charlie Crist's democratic approach to leadership: "Elected officials work for the people ... They are our boss."
Bravo. Let our city and county commissioners take note and act accordingly. Don't try to pull the wool over the voters' eyes.
Does the St. Augustine City Commission actually think they can get away with a token, in-house solution to a gravely serious environmental mistake? They not only removed contaminated landfill from one historic minority community (Lincolnville) and dumped it in yet another (West Augustine) only to unbelievably now try to repeat the same mistake and bring it back once again to Lincolnville?
How dumb do city officials think its citizens and voters are? The answer is, they apparently seem to be a lot smarter than the commissioners.
Fact: Not one of them seems concerned enough about the racial and human rights significance of this see-saw dumping of hazardous waste in and out of our major black communities.
Fact: The city's initial, illegal and irresponsible dumping of some 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil from Riberia Street to Holmes Boulevard was caught and reported by an alert and often maligned citizen activist. The city was fined a paltry sum of close to $35,000 and ordered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to remove the landfill from the Holmes Boulevard site.
Fact: The DEP and city's agreement on where they plan to move this landfill is now being hotly contested and legally appealed. Hopefully a court judge or hearing officer will see the folly and fallacy in the self-serving city commissioners' actions.
Fact: The landfill was originally tested by an independent lab that found contaminants including arsenic, pesticides and PCBs and lots of just plain trash which the state DEP said poses "a major to moderate potential for harm."
Community residents of Lincolnville, West Augustine, the city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are urged to attend a public meeting next Thursday, Jan. 10, at 6 p.m., in St. Paul AME Church, 85 Martin Luther King Ave., to find out what can be done to prevent the state and city's actions.
Representatives of the state DEP, members of the city commission, other officials, community leaders and residents have been asked to participate so that citizens will have a chance to raise questions, seek answers and discuss alternative solutions.
The public is encouraged to attend this open meeting.
• Dee Lovell is a former Baltimore Sun editor and weekly arts columnist for The Washington Post. She transplanted her community activism from Washington, D.C. to St. Augustine five years ago.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010508/opinions_37.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DEE LOVELL
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/05/08
It's the start of a brand new year. It's also a good time for city and county elected officials to begin a better era in which their government actions take better heed of the wishes and needs of their constituencies. To paraphrase Republican Gov.Charlie Crist's democratic approach to leadership: "Elected officials work for the people ... They are our boss."
Bravo. Let our city and county commissioners take note and act accordingly. Don't try to pull the wool over the voters' eyes.
Does the St. Augustine City Commission actually think they can get away with a token, in-house solution to a gravely serious environmental mistake? They not only removed contaminated landfill from one historic minority community (Lincolnville) and dumped it in yet another (West Augustine) only to unbelievably now try to repeat the same mistake and bring it back once again to Lincolnville?
How dumb do city officials think its citizens and voters are? The answer is, they apparently seem to be a lot smarter than the commissioners.
Fact: Not one of them seems concerned enough about the racial and human rights significance of this see-saw dumping of hazardous waste in and out of our major black communities.
Fact: The city's initial, illegal and irresponsible dumping of some 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil from Riberia Street to Holmes Boulevard was caught and reported by an alert and often maligned citizen activist. The city was fined a paltry sum of close to $35,000 and ordered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to remove the landfill from the Holmes Boulevard site.
Fact: The DEP and city's agreement on where they plan to move this landfill is now being hotly contested and legally appealed. Hopefully a court judge or hearing officer will see the folly and fallacy in the self-serving city commissioners' actions.
Fact: The landfill was originally tested by an independent lab that found contaminants including arsenic, pesticides and PCBs and lots of just plain trash which the state DEP said poses "a major to moderate potential for harm."
Community residents of Lincolnville, West Augustine, the city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are urged to attend a public meeting next Thursday, Jan. 10, at 6 p.m., in St. Paul AME Church, 85 Martin Luther King Ave., to find out what can be done to prevent the state and city's actions.
Representatives of the state DEP, members of the city commission, other officials, community leaders and residents have been asked to participate so that citizens will have a chance to raise questions, seek answers and discuss alternative solutions.
The public is encouraged to attend this open meeting.
• Dee Lovell is a former Baltimore Sun editor and weekly arts columnist for The Washington Post. She transplanted her community activism from Washington, D.C. to St. Augustine five years ago.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010508/opinions_37.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Landfill plan under fire
Landfill plan under fire
Lincolnville residents petition against return of material to inactive dump site
KATI BEXLEY
kati.bexley@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/07/08
For roughly 150 days, residents have stymied the city's agreement with the state that would fix its illegal dumping of old landfill material.
"I want to know what is the recommended thing to do, not the cheapest thing, like the city wants," said Judith Seraphin, a Lincolnville resident, where the landfill is located. "(Lincolnville) residents need reassurance."
Judith and Tony Seraphin joined five other residents to file a petition with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection against the city's plan. As soon as the document was filed on Dec. 29, the project was frozen, Mike Fitzsimmons, DEP Northeast District Waste Program administrator, said.
Residents are angered that the city is proposing to put back the landfill material taken from the inactive dump site on Riberia Street and bring it under Environmental Protection's control. That plan would cost $800,000, as opposed to $1 million to $2 million if the city took the material to a landfill.
The petition against this plan goes to the state's Division of Administrative Hearings, where a judge is assigned to review it, Fitzsimmons said.
Hearings such as this are usually scheduled 90 to 120 days after the petition is filed.
"The hearing may rewrite the consent order (the city has with the state for its plan)," Fitzsimmons said. "Or, it could stay where it is. The judge may like it or he might not."
The judge then gives a recommendation and sends it to Environmental Protection, which can make some changes in it. That process takes about 30 days, Fitzsimmons said.
John Regan, city chief operations officer, remains hopeful the project is delayed and not nixed.
He said the city will still hold an educational meeting for the public Thursday, which Environmental Protection representatives will attend.
"Even though there's a petition, we feel it's important to work with the community on this project," Regan said. "Outside from a few individuals, we're not hearing from the public on this, and we really want to make sure the public understands the project."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010708/news_010708018.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Lincolnville residents petition against return of material to inactive dump site
KATI BEXLEY
kati.bexley@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/07/08
For roughly 150 days, residents have stymied the city's agreement with the state that would fix its illegal dumping of old landfill material.
"I want to know what is the recommended thing to do, not the cheapest thing, like the city wants," said Judith Seraphin, a Lincolnville resident, where the landfill is located. "(Lincolnville) residents need reassurance."
Judith and Tony Seraphin joined five other residents to file a petition with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection against the city's plan. As soon as the document was filed on Dec. 29, the project was frozen, Mike Fitzsimmons, DEP Northeast District Waste Program administrator, said.
Residents are angered that the city is proposing to put back the landfill material taken from the inactive dump site on Riberia Street and bring it under Environmental Protection's control. That plan would cost $800,000, as opposed to $1 million to $2 million if the city took the material to a landfill.
The petition against this plan goes to the state's Division of Administrative Hearings, where a judge is assigned to review it, Fitzsimmons said.
Hearings such as this are usually scheduled 90 to 120 days after the petition is filed.
"The hearing may rewrite the consent order (the city has with the state for its plan)," Fitzsimmons said. "Or, it could stay where it is. The judge may like it or he might not."
The judge then gives a recommendation and sends it to Environmental Protection, which can make some changes in it. That process takes about 30 days, Fitzsimmons said.
John Regan, city chief operations officer, remains hopeful the project is delayed and not nixed.
He said the city will still hold an educational meeting for the public Thursday, which Environmental Protection representatives will attend.
"Even though there's a petition, we feel it's important to work with the community on this project," Regan said. "Outside from a few individuals, we're not hearing from the public on this, and we really want to make sure the public understands the project."
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010708/news_010708018.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Editorial: Updated city land use rules vital to its future
Editorial: Updated city land use rules vital to its future
From Staff
Publication Date: 01/06/08
The St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board was once again reminded on Wednesday that scenic vistas are an important part of our quality of life.
Lincolnville, the city's historically black community has been infused with new residents who are intent on turning it from an almost forgotten neighborhood to a vibrant community.
They came out in force on Wednesday to object to a 300 boat-slip dry storage proposal by Oasis Marina on the San Sebastian River, Lincolnville's western border.
The mass and scale was offensive enough to the residents, three or four 35-foot high buildings, but they harped again on a theme that the Zoning Board has heard many times in the past decade: loss of the scenic view, the vista.
A potentially spoiled vista comes up often.
It was the key element in a fight over a 1,000-foot dock at the proposed Fish Island development.
It came up again last month when the city proposed a 19-foot mound over a former city dump site on South Riberia Street in Lincolnville.
The city has suggested it be turned into a passive park for bird-watching, for example.
And now, the proposed 300-slip dry storage the board turned down on Wednesday.
The company can appeal the PZB decision to the City Commission. The code allows the business to build some kind of dry storage, even a wall-to-wall building, because the land is zoned industrial warehousing.
Whether the industrial warehousing zoning is still appropriate for Riberia Street is a source of community concern. The city is operating, as many cities and counties are, with zoning codes written 15-30 years ago. St. Augustine's code was adopted in 1975 and updated in 1992 when the city adopted its comprehensive plan for land use. That's still a 15-year-old code. Times and community attitudes have changed.
Zoning Board Vice Chairman John Valdes expressed a desire for a city workshop on the present zoning code in relation to today's community standards.
He said the city is dealing with issues that are "not what the code-writers thought we'd be dealing with."
We agree with Valdes.
Parts of the city's zoning code may be outdated and at the very least, incompatible with today's changing attitudes toward community development.
Following up on Valdes suggestion, Mark Knight, the city's planning director, said a workshop will be held Jan. 29 on the zoning code and the issues such as land use and protection of vistas. The meeting is at 3 p.m. in City Hall.
Knight encourages the public to speak about the city's future land use. This workshop will begin a year-long effort by the city to ensure compatibility between its state-mandated Comprehensive Plan for land use and its zoning code.
It's important for residents to participate in the effort so they can have a hand in discussions of potential zoning and land use changes.
A recent article on updating municipal codes on the Florida League of Cities Web site, www.flcities.com, puts the value of change in perspective.
Wendy Gray, League of Cities planning and land use consultant, said, "The codes serve as the blueprint for your city. By making sure the codes are sound, you are creating a solid foundation for your city for years to come."
Gray's view is right on target.
People come to St. Augustine for its heritage and its charm. Its overall quality of life converts some visitors to eventual residents.
The city's codes have to be compatible with the 21st century land use.
The fact that the city has already scheduled a workshop and is pledged to address concerns raised by Valdes and others is a sure sign city officials want the community to help direct the city's future.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010608/opinions_txt1_001.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
From Staff
Publication Date: 01/06/08
The St. Augustine Planning and Zoning Board was once again reminded on Wednesday that scenic vistas are an important part of our quality of life.
Lincolnville, the city's historically black community has been infused with new residents who are intent on turning it from an almost forgotten neighborhood to a vibrant community.
They came out in force on Wednesday to object to a 300 boat-slip dry storage proposal by Oasis Marina on the San Sebastian River, Lincolnville's western border.
The mass and scale was offensive enough to the residents, three or four 35-foot high buildings, but they harped again on a theme that the Zoning Board has heard many times in the past decade: loss of the scenic view, the vista.
A potentially spoiled vista comes up often.
It was the key element in a fight over a 1,000-foot dock at the proposed Fish Island development.
It came up again last month when the city proposed a 19-foot mound over a former city dump site on South Riberia Street in Lincolnville.
The city has suggested it be turned into a passive park for bird-watching, for example.
And now, the proposed 300-slip dry storage the board turned down on Wednesday.
The company can appeal the PZB decision to the City Commission. The code allows the business to build some kind of dry storage, even a wall-to-wall building, because the land is zoned industrial warehousing.
Whether the industrial warehousing zoning is still appropriate for Riberia Street is a source of community concern. The city is operating, as many cities and counties are, with zoning codes written 15-30 years ago. St. Augustine's code was adopted in 1975 and updated in 1992 when the city adopted its comprehensive plan for land use. That's still a 15-year-old code. Times and community attitudes have changed.
Zoning Board Vice Chairman John Valdes expressed a desire for a city workshop on the present zoning code in relation to today's community standards.
He said the city is dealing with issues that are "not what the code-writers thought we'd be dealing with."
We agree with Valdes.
Parts of the city's zoning code may be outdated and at the very least, incompatible with today's changing attitudes toward community development.
Following up on Valdes suggestion, Mark Knight, the city's planning director, said a workshop will be held Jan. 29 on the zoning code and the issues such as land use and protection of vistas. The meeting is at 3 p.m. in City Hall.
Knight encourages the public to speak about the city's future land use. This workshop will begin a year-long effort by the city to ensure compatibility between its state-mandated Comprehensive Plan for land use and its zoning code.
It's important for residents to participate in the effort so they can have a hand in discussions of potential zoning and land use changes.
A recent article on updating municipal codes on the Florida League of Cities Web site, www.flcities.com, puts the value of change in perspective.
Wendy Gray, League of Cities planning and land use consultant, said, "The codes serve as the blueprint for your city. By making sure the codes are sound, you are creating a solid foundation for your city for years to come."
Gray's view is right on target.
People come to St. Augustine for its heritage and its charm. Its overall quality of life converts some visitors to eventual residents.
The city's codes have to be compatible with the 21st century land use.
The fact that the city has already scheduled a workshop and is pledged to address concerns raised by Valdes and others is a sure sign city officials want the community to help direct the city's future.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010608/opinions_txt1_001.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Guest Column: People should attend illegal dumping meeting
Guest Column: People should attend illegal dumping meeting
DEE LOVELL
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/05/08
It's the start of a brand new year. It's also a good time for city and county elected officials to begin a better era in which their government actions take better heed of the wishes and needs of their constituencies. To paraphrase Republican Gov.Charlie Crist's democratic approach to leadership: "Elected officials work for the people ... They are our boss."
Bravo. Let our city and county commissioners take note and act accordingly. Don't try to pull the wool over the voters' eyes.
Does the St. Augustine City Commission actually think they can get away with a token, in-house solution to a gravely serious environmental mistake? They not only removed contaminated landfill from one historic minority community (Lincolnville) and dumped it in yet another (West Augustine) only to unbelievably now try to repeat the same mistake and bring it back once again to Lincolnville?
How dumb do city officials think its citizens and voters are? The answer is, they apparently seem to be a lot smarter than the commissioners.
Fact: Not one of them seems concerned enough about the racial and human rights significance of this see-saw dumping of hazardous waste in and out of our major black communities.
Fact: The city's initial, illegal and irresponsible dumping of some 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil from Riberia Street to Holmes Boulevard was caught and reported by an alert and often maligned citizen activist. The city was fined a paltry sum of close to $35,000 and ordered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to remove the landfill from the Holmes Boulevard site.
Fact: The DEP and city's agreement on where they plan to move this landfill is now being hotly contested and legally appealed. Hopefully a court judge or hearing officer will see the folly and fallacy in the self-serving city commissioners' actions.
Fact: The landfill was originally tested by an independent lab that found contaminants including arsenic, pesticides and PCBs and lots of just plain trash which the state DEP said poses "a major to moderate potential for harm."
Community residents of Lincolnville, West Augustine, the city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are urged to attend a public meeting next Thursday, Jan. 10, at 6 p.m., in St. Paul AME Church, 85 Martin Luther King Ave., to find out what can be done to prevent the state and city's actions.
Representatives of the state DEP, members of the city commission, other officials, community leaders and residents have been asked to participate so that citizens will have a chance to raise questions, seek answers and discuss alternative solutions.
The public is encouraged to attend this open meeting.
• Dee Lovell is a former Baltimore Sun editor and weekly arts columnist for The Washington Post. She transplanted her community activism from Washington, D.C. to St. Augustine five years ago.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010508/opinions_37.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DEE LOVELL
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 01/05/08
It's the start of a brand new year. It's also a good time for city and county elected officials to begin a better era in which their government actions take better heed of the wishes and needs of their constituencies. To paraphrase Republican Gov.Charlie Crist's democratic approach to leadership: "Elected officials work for the people ... They are our boss."
Bravo. Let our city and county commissioners take note and act accordingly. Don't try to pull the wool over the voters' eyes.
Does the St. Augustine City Commission actually think they can get away with a token, in-house solution to a gravely serious environmental mistake? They not only removed contaminated landfill from one historic minority community (Lincolnville) and dumped it in yet another (West Augustine) only to unbelievably now try to repeat the same mistake and bring it back once again to Lincolnville?
How dumb do city officials think its citizens and voters are? The answer is, they apparently seem to be a lot smarter than the commissioners.
Fact: Not one of them seems concerned enough about the racial and human rights significance of this see-saw dumping of hazardous waste in and out of our major black communities.
Fact: The city's initial, illegal and irresponsible dumping of some 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil from Riberia Street to Holmes Boulevard was caught and reported by an alert and often maligned citizen activist. The city was fined a paltry sum of close to $35,000 and ordered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to remove the landfill from the Holmes Boulevard site.
Fact: The DEP and city's agreement on where they plan to move this landfill is now being hotly contested and legally appealed. Hopefully a court judge or hearing officer will see the folly and fallacy in the self-serving city commissioners' actions.
Fact: The landfill was originally tested by an independent lab that found contaminants including arsenic, pesticides and PCBs and lots of just plain trash which the state DEP said poses "a major to moderate potential for harm."
Community residents of Lincolnville, West Augustine, the city of St. Augustine and St. Johns County are urged to attend a public meeting next Thursday, Jan. 10, at 6 p.m., in St. Paul AME Church, 85 Martin Luther King Ave., to find out what can be done to prevent the state and city's actions.
Representatives of the state DEP, members of the city commission, other officials, community leaders and residents have been asked to participate so that citizens will have a chance to raise questions, seek answers and discuss alternative solutions.
The public is encouraged to attend this open meeting.
• Dee Lovell is a former Baltimore Sun editor and weekly arts columnist for The Washington Post. She transplanted her community activism from Washington, D.C. to St. Augustine five years ago.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010508/opinions_37.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Equestrian homesites nixed
Equestrian homesites nixed
DOUGLAS JORDAN
Special to The Record
Publication Date: 01/04/08
Dozens of residents from the Riverdale area off County Road 13 showed up to speak to the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency on Thursday afternoon, opposing the proposed equestrian-style residential community a developer wants to build on rural farmland along the river.
After much discussion and public comments, the Agency voted to deny the developer's request to rezone 1,117 acres from its present Open Rural (OR) designation to Planned Rural Development (PRD) status to allow for the project, which would bring 223 single-family homes to an area that is popular among local residents for its quiet, rural beauty.
The area is bordered by the William Bartram Scenic Highway, which runs along the east side of the St. Johns River from Jacksonville south to northwestern St. Johns County on County Road 13. The highway is named for William Bartram, an American naturalist.
Local residents cited many concerns about the potential development, which would allow its property owners to have horses, barns and paddocks in the "reserve" area of their lots and provide riding trails through the natural habitat.
Chief among those concerns was the extra traffic the development would create and the threat to wildlife such as red foxes, gopher tortoises and bald eagles that live in the area.
"We are the last unspoiled section of the William Bartram Scenic Highway," said resident Mike Macnamara. "We want to continue to live in a rural environment. Turn down this PRD -- we don't need it."
Macnamara said the current traffic volume in the area was already a problem, and that adding a development which would have one entrance point onto County Road 13 would create "one massive bottleneck."
Other residents echoed Macnamara's points and also brought up issues of fire service, water and wildlife intrusion.
Gary Davenport, who spoke for the developer, said the project was not urban sprawl and that its proposed plan fell within the definitions prescribed by county codes and was consistent with the county's Comprehensive Plan.
Member David Wiles said the most important questions to consider for the proposed development are compatibility and concurrency.
"We could argue either way on this," Wiles said. "Is it compatible? I am as concerned about Riverdale as a particular project as I am about future developments using this as a precedent for their plans."
After listening to all the presentations, Wiles said he was opposed to the project, which he said was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use criteria or zoning requirements.
Wiles made a motion to deny the PRD, and Doug Laidlaw seconded it. The Agency members voted 6-1 against the PRD request. The dissenting vote was cast by Chairman Henry Green.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010408/news_txt1_022.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DOUGLAS JORDAN
Special to The Record
Publication Date: 01/04/08
Dozens of residents from the Riverdale area off County Road 13 showed up to speak to the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency on Thursday afternoon, opposing the proposed equestrian-style residential community a developer wants to build on rural farmland along the river.
After much discussion and public comments, the Agency voted to deny the developer's request to rezone 1,117 acres from its present Open Rural (OR) designation to Planned Rural Development (PRD) status to allow for the project, which would bring 223 single-family homes to an area that is popular among local residents for its quiet, rural beauty.
The area is bordered by the William Bartram Scenic Highway, which runs along the east side of the St. Johns River from Jacksonville south to northwestern St. Johns County on County Road 13. The highway is named for William Bartram, an American naturalist.
Local residents cited many concerns about the potential development, which would allow its property owners to have horses, barns and paddocks in the "reserve" area of their lots and provide riding trails through the natural habitat.
Chief among those concerns was the extra traffic the development would create and the threat to wildlife such as red foxes, gopher tortoises and bald eagles that live in the area.
"We are the last unspoiled section of the William Bartram Scenic Highway," said resident Mike Macnamara. "We want to continue to live in a rural environment. Turn down this PRD -- we don't need it."
Macnamara said the current traffic volume in the area was already a problem, and that adding a development which would have one entrance point onto County Road 13 would create "one massive bottleneck."
Other residents echoed Macnamara's points and also brought up issues of fire service, water and wildlife intrusion.
Gary Davenport, who spoke for the developer, said the project was not urban sprawl and that its proposed plan fell within the definitions prescribed by county codes and was consistent with the county's Comprehensive Plan.
Member David Wiles said the most important questions to consider for the proposed development are compatibility and concurrency.
"We could argue either way on this," Wiles said. "Is it compatible? I am as concerned about Riverdale as a particular project as I am about future developments using this as a precedent for their plans."
After listening to all the presentations, Wiles said he was opposed to the project, which he said was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use criteria or zoning requirements.
Wiles made a motion to deny the PRD, and Doug Laidlaw seconded it. The Agency members voted 6-1 against the PRD request. The dissenting vote was cast by Chairman Henry Green.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010408/news_txt1_022.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Retirement home rejected
Retirement home rejected
DOUGLAS JORDAN
Special to The Record
Publication Date: 01/04/08
After more than two hours of public debate at its monthly meeting on Thursday afternoon, the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency denied the application by a developer to rezone property off U.S. 1 and Old Moultrie Road to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 190-bed independent living retirement center.
Nearby residents have opposed the facility as presented by the developer, Moultrie Bluffs LLC, mainly because they do not want a full-scale nursing home in the midst of their residential community.
Agency member Doug Laidlaw said he was "struggling with the concept that this is a residential project, and not a commercial one."
Laidlaw grilled Karen Taylor, a planner for the developer, about the distinctions between special care housing and a licensed nursing care facility.
Taylor stressed that the facility would not have a full-time nursing home, but would be a residential building that coordinated care for its residents when needed through an outside provider.
"This is not much different than an apartment building," Taylor said. "It will provide assisted living, but I'm not sure why that is being looked at as a negative thing."
According to state guidelines and county code, special care housing is allowed in residential use, Taylor said. The project would also include personal services such as laundry, a restaurant and a wellness center, she said.
Scott Bartage, president of the Moultrie Trails Homeowners Association, said the developer had met with nearby residents and assured them that it would not be building a nursing home.
But Bartage said the plan presented to the county was more like a "medical office building," which was not at all acceptable to the residents.
"What this looks like is a good old-fashioned bait-and-switch routine," Bartage said. "The developer bought a piece of property, and he's entitled to develop it and make a profit.
"But it ought to be done in compatibility with what's around it. We ask that you deny this application."
Taylor said the proposed project would be "an elegant retirement center," much like The Allegro on St. Augustine Beach.
Laidlaw didn't seem convinced.
"You're going to be a nursing home, according to our land use zoning," he said. "They've used the land development code as a buffet" to pick and choose.
Laidlaw said he didn't think residents would want to see an institutional type of building in their area.
"Here's my fear: They can have 190 residents in a three-story building. It will have a commercial look to it, and it's going to look like a hospital."
Other members, such as Jim Wheeler, agreed on the appearance issue.
After Laidlaw made a motion, the Agency members voted 6-1 to deny the application. Chairman Henry Green voted against the motion to deny.
The PUD application will next go to the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, who could choose to override the Planning and Zoning Agency's decision or affirm it.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010408/news_txt1_027.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
DOUGLAS JORDAN
Special to The Record
Publication Date: 01/04/08
After more than two hours of public debate at its monthly meeting on Thursday afternoon, the St. Johns County Planning and Zoning Agency denied the application by a developer to rezone property off U.S. 1 and Old Moultrie Road to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 190-bed independent living retirement center.
Nearby residents have opposed the facility as presented by the developer, Moultrie Bluffs LLC, mainly because they do not want a full-scale nursing home in the midst of their residential community.
Agency member Doug Laidlaw said he was "struggling with the concept that this is a residential project, and not a commercial one."
Laidlaw grilled Karen Taylor, a planner for the developer, about the distinctions between special care housing and a licensed nursing care facility.
Taylor stressed that the facility would not have a full-time nursing home, but would be a residential building that coordinated care for its residents when needed through an outside provider.
"This is not much different than an apartment building," Taylor said. "It will provide assisted living, but I'm not sure why that is being looked at as a negative thing."
According to state guidelines and county code, special care housing is allowed in residential use, Taylor said. The project would also include personal services such as laundry, a restaurant and a wellness center, she said.
Scott Bartage, president of the Moultrie Trails Homeowners Association, said the developer had met with nearby residents and assured them that it would not be building a nursing home.
But Bartage said the plan presented to the county was more like a "medical office building," which was not at all acceptable to the residents.
"What this looks like is a good old-fashioned bait-and-switch routine," Bartage said. "The developer bought a piece of property, and he's entitled to develop it and make a profit.
"But it ought to be done in compatibility with what's around it. We ask that you deny this application."
Taylor said the proposed project would be "an elegant retirement center," much like The Allegro on St. Augustine Beach.
Laidlaw didn't seem convinced.
"You're going to be a nursing home, according to our land use zoning," he said. "They've used the land development code as a buffet" to pick and choose.
Laidlaw said he didn't think residents would want to see an institutional type of building in their area.
"Here's my fear: They can have 190 residents in a three-story building. It will have a commercial look to it, and it's going to look like a hospital."
Other members, such as Jim Wheeler, agreed on the appearance issue.
After Laidlaw made a motion, the Agency members voted 6-1 to deny the application. Chairman Henry Green voted against the motion to deny.
The PUD application will next go to the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, who could choose to override the Planning and Zoning Agency's decision or affirm it.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010408/news_txt1_027.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Boat storage plan sunk
Boat storage plan sunk
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/03/08
St. Augustine's Planning and Zoning Board on Wednesday scuttled a 300-slip boat storage complex on the Sebastian River, a decision helped by the complaints, petitions and testimony of Lincolnville residents.
Oasis Marina, owned by Charlie Spires of Beta Two of Alachua LLC, at 256 Riberia St., wants to build four 35-foot high buildings that would contain 300 dry boat slips.
But the residents and, later, the board said they would be too massive and block the vista and sunlight from nearby homes.
Lincolnville resident Judith Seraphin said the Lincolnville area had been improving until now,
"But that section is still zoned industrial," she said. "To have industrial use on Riberia Street is a total slap in the face (to Lincolnville residents)."
She had circulated a petition that gathered 51 signatures opposing the project.
The application had been tabled Dec. 4, 2006. It consists of four buildings, one 3,568 feet long, one 325 feet long, one 74 feet long and one 100 feet long.
The area is already zoned Industrial Warehouse with a land use designation of Marine Warehouse. The applicants wanted to place their buildings diagonally to provide some vista for residents and drivers on Riberia Street.
But that higher location put them into a conservation zone.
Now, without PZA approval, Oasis still can build along that waterfront, outside the conservation zone, but the limited vista would be gone.
Some residents testified that there would be more traffic and noise. There would be less sunlight, slighter breezes and a narrower view of the river.
They also believed that property values would drop and the marsh and shellfish would be harmed by the additional and unnatural amount of shade cast by the buildings.
But attorney Ellen Avery-Smith of Rogers, Towers of St. Augustine, called expert witnesses who testified that the wildlife would not be that affected, there would only be 12 more cars per day than now, the marina would seek Clean Marina status from the state and there would be an upland buffer created for wildlife where now there's only a shell parking lot.
"We haven't started the design aspect yet," Avery-Smith said. "The legal basis (for approval) is the code itself."
Vice Chairman John Valdes took the gavel on this item after Chairwoman Deltra Long recused herself because she lives close to the project and would be affected by it.
Valdes said the PZA often dealt with property issues under a code written in 1975 and "not what the code-writers thought we'd be dealing with."
He called for a workshop to update the code.
He also seemed to lean against approval.
"An old boat yard like that is as much a part of the community as the old houses I rehabilitate every day," he said. "I just can't get past the vista issue. Lincolnville has always been pushed aside. We'd never think of putting this property on Water Street." Misterly didn't say why he voted against the denial. But he also noted the vista issue.
"I wouldn't want it in my neighborhood, but other parts of the city aren't zoned industrial warehouse," he said.
PZA member Carl Blow said this area was the original waterfront of St. Augustine and had fishing and shrimping businesses there before those industries went bust.
"There's a shortage of deep water slips," he said, but he also cited the vista issue.
"I'd like to see drawings of what the vista would look like when you drive down Riberia Street," he said.
Bill Leary said city codes say a project must offer "no significant negative impact" and must "enhance vistas."
"We pay a great deal of attention when we consider impacting conservation zones," Leary said. "We need an environmental assessment."
On a motion to deny by PZA member Leana Freeman, the board voted 4-1 with member Grant Misterly dissenting and member Jerry Dixon absent to turn down the application.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010308/news_txt1_029.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
PETER GUINTA
peter.guinta@staugustine.com
Publication Date: 01/03/08
St. Augustine's Planning and Zoning Board on Wednesday scuttled a 300-slip boat storage complex on the Sebastian River, a decision helped by the complaints, petitions and testimony of Lincolnville residents.
Oasis Marina, owned by Charlie Spires of Beta Two of Alachua LLC, at 256 Riberia St., wants to build four 35-foot high buildings that would contain 300 dry boat slips.
But the residents and, later, the board said they would be too massive and block the vista and sunlight from nearby homes.
Lincolnville resident Judith Seraphin said the Lincolnville area had been improving until now,
"But that section is still zoned industrial," she said. "To have industrial use on Riberia Street is a total slap in the face (to Lincolnville residents)."
She had circulated a petition that gathered 51 signatures opposing the project.
The application had been tabled Dec. 4, 2006. It consists of four buildings, one 3,568 feet long, one 325 feet long, one 74 feet long and one 100 feet long.
The area is already zoned Industrial Warehouse with a land use designation of Marine Warehouse. The applicants wanted to place their buildings diagonally to provide some vista for residents and drivers on Riberia Street.
But that higher location put them into a conservation zone.
Now, without PZA approval, Oasis still can build along that waterfront, outside the conservation zone, but the limited vista would be gone.
Some residents testified that there would be more traffic and noise. There would be less sunlight, slighter breezes and a narrower view of the river.
They also believed that property values would drop and the marsh and shellfish would be harmed by the additional and unnatural amount of shade cast by the buildings.
But attorney Ellen Avery-Smith of Rogers, Towers of St. Augustine, called expert witnesses who testified that the wildlife would not be that affected, there would only be 12 more cars per day than now, the marina would seek Clean Marina status from the state and there would be an upland buffer created for wildlife where now there's only a shell parking lot.
"We haven't started the design aspect yet," Avery-Smith said. "The legal basis (for approval) is the code itself."
Vice Chairman John Valdes took the gavel on this item after Chairwoman Deltra Long recused herself because she lives close to the project and would be affected by it.
Valdes said the PZA often dealt with property issues under a code written in 1975 and "not what the code-writers thought we'd be dealing with."
He called for a workshop to update the code.
He also seemed to lean against approval.
"An old boat yard like that is as much a part of the community as the old houses I rehabilitate every day," he said. "I just can't get past the vista issue. Lincolnville has always been pushed aside. We'd never think of putting this property on Water Street." Misterly didn't say why he voted against the denial. But he also noted the vista issue.
"I wouldn't want it in my neighborhood, but other parts of the city aren't zoned industrial warehouse," he said.
PZA member Carl Blow said this area was the original waterfront of St. Augustine and had fishing and shrimping businesses there before those industries went bust.
"There's a shortage of deep water slips," he said, but he also cited the vista issue.
"I'd like to see drawings of what the vista would look like when you drive down Riberia Street," he said.
Bill Leary said city codes say a project must offer "no significant negative impact" and must "enhance vistas."
"We pay a great deal of attention when we consider impacting conservation zones," Leary said. "We need an environmental assessment."
On a motion to deny by PZA member Leana Freeman, the board voted 4-1 with member Grant Misterly dissenting and member Jerry Dixon absent to turn down the application.
Click here to return to story:
http://staugustine.com/stories/010308/news_txt1_029.shtml
© The St. Augustine Record
Monday, December 31, 2007
E-Mail to City of St. Augustine's Defense Lawyer on Illegal Dumping re: City's Environmental Racism and Dumping Public Questions for 20 Monnths
Environmental Racism by the City of St. Augustine, Florida -- Lincolnville and West Augustine Communities as Dumping Grounds
E-mail to William L. Pence, Esquire with Akerman Senterfitt in Orlando, Florida
Dear Mr. Pence:
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said that St. Augustine was the "most lawless" city in America.
Exactly what has changed? Institutional racism thrives and is now enshrined in a Consent Order on illegal dumping -- one you pushed for 20 months because the City refuses to dispose of solid waste in a Class I landfill, insisting on shipping it back to Linconville.
At the suggestion of John Regan, P.E. from the City of St. Augustine (and more recently Gregory J. Strong, Regional Director of FDEP), I have been attempting to reach you for 20 months. I first tried to reach you on or about February 27, 2006 regarding environmental crimes by the City fo St. Augustine. I reached you at FDEP before one of your meetings there, but you hung up the telehone without speaking.
If you had ever spoken with me, you might have learned something, e.g., information that might have prevented your proposing sending the solid waste from the Old City Reservoir into the Lincolnville community.
Adopted in secrecy and hostility -- rubberstamped outside the ordinary course of business, with the public denied the right to speak -- your Consent Decree is an embarassment to oru Nation's Oldest City. It is frankly an embarassment to Akerman Senterfitt and all of its lawyers.
Since you or someone in your firm apparently did a Yahoo! search on me this morning, perhaps you're ready to have a conversation after 20 months.
It's time for the City of St. Augustine to answer questions in public -- after 20 months of your billing our City for defense of the indefensible -- a pattern of deplorable environmental racism that has adversely affected two (2) Environmental Justice communities.
Kindly advise the City that the Consent Order is a non-starter and that we expect the City to comply with the March 15, 2006 order to remove all of the contaminants from the Old City Reservoir and place them in a Class I landfill.
I have taken the liberty of calling your ill-advised, controversial Consent Order to the attention of Judge Joseph Hatchett of your firm. May I suggest that you and Judge Hatchett (chair of the Akerman Senterfitt Diversity Committee and Appellate Practice) attend the January 10, 2008 meeting?
I hope that Judge Hatchett and you might both attend the meeting with FDEP in Lincolnville on January 10, 2008 at St. Paul's A.M.E. Church, 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., St. Augustine, Florida, at 6 PM.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you and Happy New Year.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
www.cleanupcityofstaugustine.blogspot.com
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
904-471-7023
904-471-9918 (fax)
E-mail to William L. Pence, Esquire with Akerman Senterfitt in Orlando, Florida
Dear Mr. Pence:
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said that St. Augustine was the "most lawless" city in America.
Exactly what has changed? Institutional racism thrives and is now enshrined in a Consent Order on illegal dumping -- one you pushed for 20 months because the City refuses to dispose of solid waste in a Class I landfill, insisting on shipping it back to Linconville.
At the suggestion of John Regan, P.E. from the City of St. Augustine (and more recently Gregory J. Strong, Regional Director of FDEP), I have been attempting to reach you for 20 months. I first tried to reach you on or about February 27, 2006 regarding environmental crimes by the City fo St. Augustine. I reached you at FDEP before one of your meetings there, but you hung up the telehone without speaking.
If you had ever spoken with me, you might have learned something, e.g., information that might have prevented your proposing sending the solid waste from the Old City Reservoir into the Lincolnville community.
Adopted in secrecy and hostility -- rubberstamped outside the ordinary course of business, with the public denied the right to speak -- your Consent Decree is an embarassment to oru Nation's Oldest City. It is frankly an embarassment to Akerman Senterfitt and all of its lawyers.
Since you or someone in your firm apparently did a Yahoo! search on me this morning, perhaps you're ready to have a conversation after 20 months.
It's time for the City of St. Augustine to answer questions in public -- after 20 months of your billing our City for defense of the indefensible -- a pattern of deplorable environmental racism that has adversely affected two (2) Environmental Justice communities.
Kindly advise the City that the Consent Order is a non-starter and that we expect the City to comply with the March 15, 2006 order to remove all of the contaminants from the Old City Reservoir and place them in a Class I landfill.
I have taken the liberty of calling your ill-advised, controversial Consent Order to the attention of Judge Joseph Hatchett of your firm. May I suggest that you and Judge Hatchett (chair of the Akerman Senterfitt Diversity Committee and Appellate Practice) attend the January 10, 2008 meeting?
I hope that Judge Hatchett and you might both attend the meeting with FDEP in Lincolnville on January 10, 2008 at St. Paul's A.M.E. Church, 85 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., St. Augustine, Florida, at 6 PM.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you and Happy New Year.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
www.cleanupcityofstaugustine.blogspot.com
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
904-471-7023
904-471-9918 (fax)
FDEP Has No Agenda Yet for January 10, 2008 Meeting at St. Paul's A.M.E. Church at 85 Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. on City's illegal Dumping
Friday's Florida Administrative Weekly noticed the meeting and said to contact Michael Fitzsimmons for the agenda. No agenda is available yet.
State officials did not attend the November 13 City Commission meeting where a controversial Consent Order sending solid waste back to Linconville was rubber-stamped.
State officials refused to speak at the December 13 meeting, claiming they had to give one week's notice in the Florida Administrative Register weekly. State officials never gave any notice of their secret meetings with City officials.
State and city officials tried to force the December 13 and January 10 meetings to take place in City Hall, an unfriendly place where they've removed half the chairs from the City Commission meeting room -- a place where dissenting citizens are regularly scorned by lugubrious goobers who know not that they know not that they know not.
Now FDEP has given one week's notice, inviting people to contact it for an agenda that does not exist yet. These other-directed state officials are evidently waiting for AKERMAN SENTERFITT lawyer William Pence and St. Augustine City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS to give them their marching orders.
Is this any way to run a railroad?
http://www.floridatoday.com/blogs/talktome/uploaded_images/train_wreck-782867.jpg
State officials did not attend the November 13 City Commission meeting where a controversial Consent Order sending solid waste back to Linconville was rubber-stamped.
State officials refused to speak at the December 13 meeting, claiming they had to give one week's notice in the Florida Administrative Register weekly. State officials never gave any notice of their secret meetings with City officials.
State and city officials tried to force the December 13 and January 10 meetings to take place in City Hall, an unfriendly place where they've removed half the chairs from the City Commission meeting room -- a place where dissenting citizens are regularly scorned by lugubrious goobers who know not that they know not that they know not.
Now FDEP has given one week's notice, inviting people to contact it for an agenda that does not exist yet. These other-directed state officials are evidently waiting for AKERMAN SENTERFITT lawyer William Pence and St. Augustine City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRISS to give them their marching orders.
Is this any way to run a railroad?
http://www.floridatoday.com/blogs/talktome/uploaded_images/train_wreck-782867.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)