FACING UP TO ODOR COMPLAINTS AT A WOOD RECYCLING SITE

BioCycle September 2003, Vol. 44, No. 9, p. 31

Experiences at a California chipping/grinding facility lead to many tough lessons on problem-solving - and a future composting operation. Part II

Robert Rynk

LAST MONTH, we reported on what it takes to achieve an “odor turnaround” at a composting facility in Massachusetts. In this issue, we travel 3,000 miles away to describe the struggles and strategies at a wood chipping/grinding operation in California. It is a saga of neighbors, land use, recycling mandates, the constraints of natural processes, the realities of business economics, shifting regulations and materials handling.

California Wood Recycling (CalWood) began processing wood residues in 1990. The chipping/grinding facility began as a means to recycle branches and limbs from an associated tree trimming business. Thirteen years ago, the facility had a seemingly ideal location on a five-acre parcel along the north bank of the Santa Clara River in the city of Ventura but near the boundary with the city of Oxnard. It was situated next to the Montalvo Municipal Improvement District's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Also operating on the same site was a Liquid Waste Treatment Facility (LWTF) disposal site run by Ventura Regional Sanitation District, which contracts to run both treatment plants. The area was surrounded by farms - miles from residential neighborhoods.

By 1996, the situation had changed. Not only had the facility successfully attracted more feedstock, but the neighborhood had changed as houses arrived in CalWood's “air shed.” A residential development sprouted up across the river, less than a half-mile to the south of the facility. Both of these factors - the expanding feedstocks (including yard trimmings) and the new neighbors - contributed to the odor problems that the facility began to experience beginning in 1997. These problems led to a series of events that included a pair of lawsuits and subsequent settlements, an odor control or “compliance” plan for the facility, implementation of odor controls, severe restrictions on the facility's operation, third party verification and, eventually, the realization the facility needed to move to a new site in order to survive economically.

GROWTH, MARKET SUCCESS, CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
When the CalWood facility first started, it was handling strictly woody residues. The feedstocks were ground, screened and stored on-site until the markets were ready to take them. Originally, the primary customers for the products were biomass burning electric generating plants. For the first few years, tree trimming services remained the primary source of these wood residues. However, as recycling of yard trimmings (called “green waste” in California) was mandated by law, opportunities arose to process more materials. The facility simply broadened its feedstocks to include other materials in the curbside recycle containers - yard trimmings like green brush, leaves and grass clippings.

Concurrently, CalWood was having success selling products. It purchased a well established manufacturer of soil products called “Agromin.” These products are marketed to farms, vineyards, flower growers, nurseries, landscape contractors, garden centers, golf courses, sod farms, grounds maintenance and athletic fields (Web site: www.agromin.com). Soon product sales comprised 45 percent of company's revenue. In short, the marketing success justified the increasing volume and diversity of feedstocks. However, the flow of materials onto and off of the site did not necessarily match, especially taking into account the seasonal and weather-related nature of green waste generation and product use.

With increasing volumes of feedstocks arriving, as the popularity of recycling caught on, the amount of material on-site increased. The facility accumulated larger stockpiles of processed products and raw feedstock waiting to be processed.

While CalWood was processing wood residues almost exclusively, the large piles were not a serious problem due to the slow decomposition of wood. As yard trimmings became a significant component of the feedstock mix, odors became more noticeable and persistent. Bill Camarillo, the owner and manager of CalWood, states that the shift toward green waste was a bigger factor than the volume increase, with “grass being the worst culprit.” Because air can “drain” like water to low lying areas, odors generated at the CalWood facility, or anywhere in the valley, often follow the river. As the odors emanating from the site became more frequent and longer lasting, it migrated to the houses “downstream.” In turn, the odor complaints also flowed to the Ventura County Environmental Health Division (EHD).

CalWood's situation was complicated by the presence of several other odor generating land uses in the air shed, or “wind corridor” as Camarillo refers to it. These other potential odor sources include the LWTF and the WWTP next door, a mushroom production facility within two miles (also on the river) and multiple farms that use manure as fertilizer. In many cases, the odors sensed by the neighbors were related to one of these other sources. Nevertheless, the regulatory hammer came down on CalWood. Bill Stratton, Manager of the Technical Services Section for the EHD, acknowledges that there are other odor sources in the area. However, Stratton says “the complaints that we received, and verified, and the enforcement actions we initiated were directly related to the odors generated by the CalWood facility.”

LEGAL ACTIONS BEGIN
In August 2000, the EHD brought a lawsuit against CalWood, seeking “injunctive relief,” that is, to have the odor emissions stopped, whatever that takes. The two parties went before the judge with the EHD arguing that the chipping/grinding facility was creating nuisance odors and CalWood responding that other facilities were contributing to the area's odors. The judge encouraged the parties to solve the problem themselves, in other words, to forge a settlement.

CalWood and EHD agreed to a settlement in May 2001. The settlement obligated CalWood to adhere to a revised “facility compliance plan” (FCP) that CalWood developed with Matt Cotton of Integrated Waste Management Consulting (Nevada City, CA). The revised FCP detailed management practices intended to streamline site operations and, in doing so, minimize the odors emitted from the site. The proposed practices ranged from processing incoming materials more quickly to treating odors on site. The compliance plan also committed CalWood and the EHD to follow specific procedures in the event of odor problems.

A key component of the FCP was to accelerate processing of material on the site. The FCP called for the feedstocks to be processed within seven days of arriving and to be shipped out within 23 days after processing. The faster throughput allowed CalWood to handle much of its feedstock load while maintaining the amount of material on site below the 30,000 cubic yard (cy) limit, the maximum allowed by its permit. Overall, however, the amount of material contained on the site decreased substantially, compared to the roughly 60,000 cy processed before 2001. In addition, the FCP dictated that storage piles would be reduced in height to 15 ft. on average (20 ft. maximum).

The FCP also proposed an increase in CalWood's use of odor control chemicals. To limit the release of odors, CalWood experimented with several odor control chemicals and eventually settled on a product called “Aireactor.” According to Paul Pizem of Aireactor, Inc., “When applied as a mist or fog, the mix chemicals in the product attach to, and chemically react with, the volatile odorous compounds in the air, neutralizing the odors.” The facility uses this product at a dilution ratio of 100 to 1 (diluted with water) at several points in the process. The facility has a permanent perimeter misting system that sprays the chemical when the prevailing winds are blowing towards the residential neighbors. In addition, a portable spray unit is used to apply the product on the surface of piles of newly delivered materials and on ground where piles where stored. According to Camarillo, the chemical works well as a short-term odor suppression tool.

In addition, CalWood installed a Columbia Weather Systems Capricorn weather station that records data onto the facilities computer. The intent is to correlate meteorological conditions with odor complaints to better identify those conditions that cause odors to impact the surrounding neighborhood. With an understanding of the critical weather conditions, the facility can adjust site activities to minimize the off-site impacts.

To further understand the odor dynamics at the facility, and to recognize whether the proposed odor mitigation practices were being effective, the compliance plan prescribed “increased communication with the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) office” (i.e. the EHD). The FCP stated that feedback between CalWood and the EHD was “crucial” to identifying odor-related problems and knowing whether the health department staff were satisfied.

The FCP included a provision and protocol for reducing the amount of material on the site if the odor control practices proposed should “prove inadequate.” By this provision, odorous material could be removed at a rate of five percent of the existing volume per day. Removal of the “offending material” would continue daily “until the odors are no longer detectable off-site as verified by the LEA.” However, before reaching this point, several conditions had to be met. First, multiple odor complaints had to be received and verified by the EHD. The FCP defines “verified” as meaning “that the LEA documents CalWood's facility is indeed the source of the odor by going to the location of the complaint and verifying that weather conditions (particularly wind direction) are such that the complaints are reasonable.” Second, other odor reducing measures must have been exhausted.

After the settlement, the facility operated under the compliance plan, confident that odors were remaining in check. However, despite the changes made at CalWood, neighbors continued to complain. Stratton points out that the compliance plan called for odors to be “minimized to the satisfaction of neighbors and regulators.” However, Camarillo counters that “The odor plan was intended to minimize odors and it has been successful in doing that. We did not claim that the odors would never occur, although that is the only thing that will satisfy the neighbors - that is what they want and expect.”

MEANWHILE, BACK IN SACRAMENTO
While CalWood was pressing forward with its compliance plan, other significant changes were taking place in the background. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) had promulgated new regulations governing the operation of green waste “chipping and grinding” facilities. The intent of the new regulations was to close purported loopholes in the composting regulations that allowed chipping and grinding operations to accumulate large volumes of green waste for extended time periods.

The new regulations called for a maximum turnaround time of 48 hours at chipping and grinding facilities, with some contingencies allowed for weekend and holidays. In addition, the maximum volume of material permitted on-site (at any given time) was reduced to 5,000 cy. The new regulations, which had been in process for several months, officially took effect in April of 2003, although some requirements, like volume reduction, may be phased in. The responsibility of implementing the regulations at the local level falls on the LEA, the agency responsible for interpreting and enforcing California's environmental regulations. In Ventura County, the EHD is the LEA.

For CalWood, the new limits represented a huge change. At the beginning of 2003, the facility was allowed to hold 30,000 cy of material on-site for 30 days.

LEGAL ACTIONS CONTINUE
In the later part of 2002, the city of Oxnard organized community meetings encouraging residents to fill out forms that they provided to distinguish odors in the area. The city's efforts appeared to focus on CalWood, as the forms were identified as “CalWood Recycling Odor Complaint Forms.” Odor complaints to the EHD increased. Because the EHD lacked the staff to verify all complaints, especially since complaints could be received at any time of day, the EHD deputized the Oxnard WWTP personnel to do so.

As a result of the odor complaints and its verification process, in January 2003, the EHD required CalWood to begin removing five percent of the on-site material per day. To CalWood, the situation reeked of unfairness. Not only was there a presumption that CalWood was the source of the community odors, but the company also felt that it was excluded from the verification process. Contrary to the previous agreement, communications with the EHD were not increased. Consequently, after a few days of mandatory five percent reductions, CalWood filed an injunction against the EHD. The purposes of the injunction, according to Camarillo, was “to get the court to intervene in the odor verification process.” The company's position is that the EHD was not following the protocol established in the FCP and the entire process was biased against CalWood.

Not surprisingly, the EHD had a different view of the situation. Stratton remembers, “the EHD sent numerous letters to CalWood about odor violations and met with the company several times to tell them that the odor violations had to be resolved to avoid enforcement action.” Stratton continues: “We are confident that the actions taken by the EHD were due to odors coming from the CalWood facility. We also investigated several odor complaints that were not found to be from CalWood.”

In April of 2003, CalWood and the EHD went to court before the same judge who orchestrated the first settlement. The judge asked for sworn testimony to decide this issue. CalWood brought in expert witnesses to testify including Cotton and Jeff Gage of Compost Design Services. These experts testified that other significant sources of odor existed in the area and that CalWood's operating procedures appeared to be managing odors. The EHD stuck to its claim, saying that the odors were verified and coming from CalWood's facility. Even before all of the witnesses, interested parties and residents were heard, the judge compelled the EHD and CalWood to mediate a solution.

A “PERMANENT SOLUTION”
The court-motivated mediation resulted in a second settlement, or “stipulated agreement,” in early May, 2003. The most significant feature of the 2003 agreement is that it prescribes a time frame for the closure of the current CalWood facility, a move that the agreement terms a “permanent solution to the problem of off-site odors.” It stipulates that CalWood must move by May, 2004. The remaining provisions address what happens in the meantime, including additional odor management practices, CalWood's downsizing to meet the new state regulations, and the implementation and oversight of the resulting transition.

To address the immediate odor situation, CalWood agreed to enhance its odor control strategy. Several of the measures added concern materials handling procedures. For instance, upon delivery, loads of incoming green wastes are now mixed with wood chips. This practice improves aeration of piles waiting processing and reduces the odors released during grinding. Also, material flow patterns have been altered to insure a first-in first-out processing schedule. A delay in processing due to equipment failure is checked by the county's requirement for redundant equipment - specifically the availability of a “back-up” grinder. In addition, after grinding, the materials are required to be stored in piles not to exceed 10 ft. in height, 20 ft. in width and 100 ft. in length. Other odor control measures implemented include explicit steps to maintain the pad surface and expanded use of odor control chemicals.

At the court's suggestion, CalWood and EHD agreed to obtain an independent third party to oversee implementation of and compliance with the 2003 agreement. The services of the “compliance officer” are paid by CalWood. Meetings were held with the neighborhood council and they concurred with the EHD's and CalWood's choice of the compliance officer - the consulting firm of Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. The compliance officer has a range of responsibilities related to the stipulated agreement. For example, the compliance officer is the main contact with the residents, attending community meetings and reporting progress. While the Oxnard WWTP staff remain the point of contact for odor complaints, the compliance officer investigates them - identifying the source of the odors, and noting the circumstances including weather conditions. The compliance officer also submits a monthly report to the judge and EHD regarding compliance with the new agreement.

One way or another, CalWood had to meet the 48-hour/5000 cy limits required by the new state regulations. The 2003 settlement provided a vehicle for CalWood and EHD to come to terms with that. They agreed on the following schedule for reducing the on-site volume - 12,000 cy by May 9; 10,000 cy by May 31; 8,000 cy by July 31, and 5,000 cy by September 2. Similarly, a schedule for reducing total throughput time was established - 15 days by May 9; 10 days by June 30; 7 days by July 31 and 2 days by September 2, 2003. Among the responsibilities of the compliance officer is to monitor the facility's progress with the volume reduction. According to Stratton, the compliance officer reported that, as of August 22, 2003, the volume of material on the CalWood site was 4,000 cy.

With the drastic changes imposed by the state regulations and operational restrictions, it became apparent to CalWood that operation at the current site is no longer feasible. As Camarillo says, “ it is just too tough to make it economically at the current site. It is too small and too close to neighbors.” Therefore, CalWood agreed to vacate the current site and with EHD set a deadline for doing so. As per the new agreement, CalWood must “relocate the Ventura facility by May 1, 2004.” CalWood has identified another site for the new facility in Ventura County, approximately ten miles from its current location. The new facility is intended to be a composting operation, not a chipping and grinding facility. Thus more material can be processed on the site, and it can remain there longer, although permitting requirements are more stringent. CalWood has applied for a “conditional use” permit, which is currently pending approval. As Camarillo puts it, “the process is slow. Because of the publicity surrounding the previous odor complaints, we are under more scrutiny.”

LESSONS LEARNED
CalWood's odor story is full of frustrations for the company, the EHD and the local community. For CalWood, the story appears to have an unpleasant ending - the Ventura facility will be closed. However, given the new state regulations for chipping and grinding facilities, this move may have been unavoidable in any case. Regardless, the company needs a composting facility, which can process and store organic feedstocks for a longer time and in larger volumes to produce a value-added product.

For the community, the ending may not be the “permanent solution” desired. After CalWood departs, other sources of odor will remain. In fact, a report prepared for the city of Oxnard by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. in October of 2002, indicated that the LWTF had the “highest potential off-site odor impact.” While this report makes it clear that its assessment was a “snapshot” in time, based on limited field surveys, the estimated impact of the LWTF was “ten times” greater than that estimated for the “nearest remaining source,” namely CalWood. The community will be confronting odors, even without the CalWood facility. The remaining odor sources - agricultural and publicly-operated facilities, will be more difficult to remove (outside of the LEA's jurisdiction).

This story highlights the fact that odors remain a constant challenge, perhaps the greatest challenge, for facilities that process organic residuals. The utility and service that organic recycling facilities provide is often obscured by the controversy that arises from the inevitable odors. As Bill Camarillo puts it, “We are in the business of commercializing Mother Nature's process, and it has a smell.” For Camarillo, the situation holds a number of lessons. “Once odor complaints happen, it is tough to shake them. Neighbors have no tolerance for odors after they have been stung. Therefore, you have to move quickly when odor problems arise. You have to communicate with neighbors and respond to their issues. Do not ignore the situation. Beyond that, you have to educate those involved about the difference between minimizing and eliminating odors.” Finally, Camarillo adds with tongue in cheek, “Try not to operate close to any neighbors.”

Editor's note: Documents related to this story can be found on the Ventura County EHD web site: www.ventura.org/envhealth/programs.htm.

Copyright 2003, The JG Press, Inc.