HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Board of Health October 12 20041
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Special Board of Health Work Session
October 12, 2004
Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Sam Crawford
Seth Fleetwood
Sharon Roy
Absent:
L. Ward Nelson
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE (WCC) TITLE 24,
HEALTH CODE, TO CREATE WCC 24.12, MUSHROOM SUBSTRATE
PRODUCTION FACILITY RULES (AB2004 -300)
McShane moved to accept additional material received as part of the official
record.
Motion carried 5 -0 with Caskey- Schreiber out of the room and Nelson
absent.
McShane stated there may be another public hearing, depending on the
changes the Council will work through. The Health Department submitted a revised
version that is based on public comments. He asked for a summary of the changes
and staff report.
Fleetwood stated the revised draft is dated October 1, 2004.
Jeff Hegedus, Environmental Health Supervisor, stated the Health
Department put together the staff report in response to the community and
industry comments. He presented a revised draft that reflects those comments.
The staff report addresses the authority of the Health Department to do this
amendment. The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 70.05.060(3) through (5)
indicate the department's authority. Paragraph (5) allows abatement of nuisances
detrimental to public health. That is the authority for introducing this ordinance.
Crawford asked how this nuisance is detrimental. The Council and
community at -large is adverse to nuisances. He asked how a nuisance that is
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
detrimental to public health is defined. The issue is whether this nuisance is
detrimental to public health. Hegedus stated there have been many reports of
gagging, nausea, exacerbated asthma, and other health conditions, which have a
public health impact and caused by a nuisance detrimental to public health.
The current regulatory framework section of the staff report outlines a recent
ruling that may have removed the Health Department's regulatory oversight via
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173 -350. Currently according to WAC 173-
350, mushroom substrate facilities are exempt if they meet criteria. In light of that
vacuum and the region having stringent regulations on the industry, the Health
Department has introduced this ordinance.
McShane asked if the Health Department would be involved if they didn't
treat this issue as a health issue, but only as a nuisance. Hegedus stated a county
in Pennsylvania set up a similar regulation through zoning. However, the Planning
Department is not set up for overseeing operational issues. The Health Department
is used to going out and managing permits.
McShane asked if the Health Department now goes out to manage
agricultural composting facilities per the State code. Hegedus stated it does, per
WAC 173 -350. They look at land application of bio- solids and operations regulated
by permit.
Regarding proposed permitting, there was a question from the public about
the types of facilities required to get a permit. All facilities except existing small
facilities, under about 40 cubic yards of material on site, have to have a permit.
Regarding agricultural operations, there is no intention of regulating
agricultural operations. They are already sufficiently regulated by other rules. This
is a very different type of operation.
Public health impacts have already been mentioned. There is a lot of
emerging literature on the impact to communities. There are many reports of
serious health -based symptoms. They don't need to have a disease linked to an
agent to prevent control or to mitigate impacts.
Fleetwood stated the design component doesn't apply to a facility that
doesn't expand. He asked if the performance requirement deals with operations
provisions. Hegedus stated all facilities will have to meet performance standards.
All except the small facilities must have a permit and submit operational
management plans. Facilities that expand will have to adhere to design standards.
The current existing small facility will be required to have a permit, meet
performance standards, and have an operational plan. It will not be required to
meet design standards. That means it will not be required to invest in an indoor
facility, bio- filtration, and scrubbers. The revised draft considers allowing that
existing facility to expand up to 50 percent without design standards kicking in,
assuming performance standards are still met.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 2
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
1
2 Fleetwood asked if a violation of performance standard (c) about nuisance
3 odors by the existing facility would be because of lack of compliance with the
4 operating standards. Hegedus stated that is correct.
5
6 Hegedus stated it is difficult or not feasible to do continuous monitoring at
7 property boundaries to determine whether or not there is more than a nuisance
8 odor. There are not community standards for comparing pollutants to see if those
9 standards are being exceeded. They do have occupational standards for regulated
10 compounds. However, they can't monitor air constituents at the property boundary
11 and compare them with community standards. Therefore, they are going to be left
12 with a situation where nuisance orders will be subjectively evaluated. The intent of
13 the proposed rule is to establish minimum permitting and design standards to do
14 the best they can to manage migration, and still be reasonable.
15
16 McShane asked if that is the same rationale applied to the applicability of
17 design standards allowing a 50 percent increase in the monthly production.
18 Hegedus stated there are too many different variables to determine the amount of
19 expansion without design standards that would be right. The way the operations
20 are managed is important. They are looking at giving an existing facility an
21 opportunity to employ some technology. The Health Department will require the
22 facility to show that it can expand and still meet the performance standards before
23 it will work through the permit process. That's why it's not unreasonable to
24 consider expansion for existing facilities.
25
26 Crawford asked why the amount 50 percent was chosen. Hegedus stated
27 there are too many factors to choose 50 percent as the exact right amount. It
28 depends on how the facility is sited and managed. The level of 50 percent was
29 chosen based on the best information they have at hand. They know that the one
30 large existing facility did create a response from the community when it expanded
31 to produce substrate to ship to Canada. It was a significant change in the level of
32 nuisance odor. That doesn't mean any expansion is unreasonable. If it expands, it
33 must employ some type of technology.
34
35 McShane asked if the Health Department would use its best judgment, based
36 on what operational things the facility could put in place and the record of how the
37 facility has been doing, to be confident that the facility wouldn't cause problems in
38 the future as long as it operates in an appropriate manner. Hegedus stated that's
39 correct. If the facility expanded but did not manage the operation, it would have to
40 scale back down.
:51
42 Roy stated that if the County were to determine that the facility can't
43 manage its operations, there are remedies. However, the County has experienced
44 another company that did not take care of its problems. Local citizens suffered and
45 complained. She's concerned about the lapse if a remedy doesn't work. She asked
46 if the neighbors will suffer for a long time before the County gets around to
47 enforcing the permit and making a change. Hegedus stated this ordinance provides
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
stronger regulatory oversight than it had in past years. In the past, the Northwest
Air Pollution Authority (NWAPA) was the only authority to do regulation. This
ordinance is much better. The facility will be under a permit. Performance
standards are from the WAC. There is a stronger regulatory mechanism. The delay
during enforcement should be much shorter. The Health Department will work with
the producer on an operating plan to see what needs to be fixed.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there is a long history of having to reconcile an
operation. Over the last five years, there have been 1,100 complaints, 26
violations, and $106,000 in fines against the other facility. She's concerned the
allowable expansion will allow that to happen again with this facility. She asked
how to quantify Ostrom's average production rate for the past three months, and if
there is any way to compare that with another facility of equal size to make sure
the figures are accurate.
Regina Delahunt, Health Department Director, stated the problem with the
first facility was because the County didn't have any regulatory authority. There
was only a negotiated agreement. If a facility operates under a permit, and it
doesn't meet standards and doesn't comply, then the permit is revoked and the
facility must discontinue operation. This regulatory scheme allows the County
authority to shut down a facility.
Hegedus stated the existing facility produces about 1,600 cubic yards of
substrate per month. The Health Department would work with the company to
verify that amount. An expansion of 50 percent would allow production up to 2,400
cubic yards per month. That is not the largest facility. It is a medium -sized facility.
If the facility is 50 or 100 yards off of the current capacity, it's not much.
Brenner asked if Canada allows a 50 percent expansion. Hegedus stated
Canada requires all facilities to adhere to design standards. There was no exclusion
or grandfathering.
Caskey- Schreiber asked the amount the Ferndale facility put out. Hegedus
stated he was not sure.
Chris Street, Ostrom Farms, stated the Ferndale facility's maximum design
capacity about 2,500 cubic yards per week.
Hegedus stated that equals 10,000 cubic yards per month. That is a much
larger capacity. The legal proceedings from British Columbia are included in the
Council packet.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to amend sections 24.12.110(1), (3), and (5),
"...of the property line boundary of the existing or proposed facility..."
McShane asked if this is okay with staff. Delahunt indicated it is.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 4
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner moved to amend 24.12.040(2), "...does not expand its operation
resulting on ngere than a 50% increase in monthly substrate preduction, based on
the average preduetien rate ever the three menths prier te the effective date ef thi-S
ehapte ." Canada doesn't allow an expansion.
Fleetwood stated allowing exemptions for some expansion is an effort to
compromise between the neighbors and industry. Compromise works only if there
is a reason to rely on the performance standards working and being enforced. He
asked if they have that confidence. Hegedus stated Canada doesn't have an
exemption for expansion. It does allow a variance permit. Their code is similar to
this ordinance, except a facility doesn't have to get a permit if it follows the
requirements. If the facility doesn't follow the regulations, it has to apply for a
permit and permission for siting, operations, and design. Canada grants an
exemption from design standards, but implements it differently.
McShane stated a new facility would have to meet all the design, operating,
and performance standards. There is no ability to opt out of those standards.
Hegedus stated that is correct.
Fleetwood asked if Ostrom's 50 percent expansion will result in an odor
increase for the neighbors. Hegedus stated Ostrom's is required to meet
performance standards whether or not it expands. If that facility expands up to the
allowed amount, it will have to employ some technology and manage operations.
There's no guarantee that the expansion will work. If doesn't work, it won't be
allowed to produce at that capacity.
Fleetwood asked the evidence that would trigger a forced reduction in
production capacity. Hegedus stated NWAPA and the Health Department would
work with the community and producer to determine whether the standards will be
met.
Fleetwood asked the evidence that would have to be presented by the
neighborhood to result in a successful stop work order from the Health Department.
Hegedus stated the first step is the NWAPA regulatory oversight of nuisance orders.
If the odors aren't abated and are also causing health impacts, enforcement action
will occur.
Brenner stated the former facility, IMS, used to do most of their polluting at
night and on weekends. It's difficult to get NWAPA or the Health Department staff
out during those times. The process sounds easy. However, in reality the process
didn't work that way the last time. Stick with stricter standards.
Delahunt stated she agreed with Councilmember Brenner that this isn't easy.
The County will need a record of complaints and odors before shutting down a
facility. The County has to work with the facility to try operationally to improve
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
situation. The difference between these rules and the rules applied to IMS is that
the Health Department didn't have the authority to shut down IMS. The Health
Department can't shut down a facility instantaneously, but it will be in a better
position to protect the neighbors with a permitting authority. The Health
Department still has to go through due process and apply civil penalties.
Enforcement wouldn't take years, like it did with IMS.
Earlier they talked about allowing a 50 percent expansion before design
standards apply. Design standards do not guarantee that there won't be a
nuisance. The odors come from how a facility is operated. There is a better chance
of minimizing odors with the additional design controls.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she likes that there is more regulation of this
industry. She asked how the 50 percent level for expansion was chosen. That level
seems arbitrary. The facility should have to prove it could operate at an expanded
capacity without harm to the neighborhood citizens, rather than the citizens having
to prove there is a problem. Make sure the County doesn't place that burden on
the citizens. Delahunt stated the 50 percent level was chosen based on the
concerns they've heard and the ultimate size of the existing facility. Staff thought
50 percent seemed reasonable for the existing business and the fact that the
expansion won't happen if the facility doesn't meet the performance standards.
The level is a reasonable compromise in the staff's view, but the Council makes the
policy.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Crawford stated the County does not have an obligation to the existing
manufacturer to allow the facility to expand. However, if the existing business
owners want to update operations with new technology, the owners need a
mechanism to do that.
Roy stated she is in favor of the motion. The Council wasn't part of the
process to put in the 50 percent stipulation. The Council has had lots of written
input. It's not clear how the staff came up with 50 percent. Citizens shouldn't have
to get sick for the County to remediate the situation. They don't wait until
someone crashes a car before giving the driver a ticket. The Council can anticipate
consequences. Don't wait until citizens get sick before fixing nuisance problems.
Fleetwood stated that presently, a health complaint triggers review, whether
or not a facility expands. The purpose of allowing expansion is to allow someone
who has been producing for a long time to expand operations, which is done in
recognition that there are stringent performance standards. If there is a complaint,
the complaint could result in an operation being stopped. There will have to be a
complaint regardless of whether or not there is an expansion.
Motion carried 4 -2 with Fleetwood and McShane opposed.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
McShane stated they would introduce the revised draft, as amended.
Bob Carmichael, attorney, stated the Hopewell Neighborhood Association,
approves of this vote. It is important to not allow expansion. This is a health and
safety regulation, not a zoning regulation. He is not aware of exemptions like this
for health and safety regulations.
Define a proposed facility. There is a potential for a gap otherwise. The
definition of a facility should say that it includes both existing and proposed
facilities.
Ask for a performance deposit because performance is difficult to enforce. All
the tools the Health Department can have at its disposal will be useful. His written
comments are made in the spirit of making the ordinance a better ordinance.
Christopher Street, Ostrom Farms, stated expansion ought to be allowed in a
reasonable way. Don't move too fast yet on not allowing expansion. The health
issue has been in front of the Council for only a few months. If expansion were
allowed, Ostrom would like to be able to double its size. They produce about 380
cubic yards each week. That equates to 10,325 square feet of bed space they fill
every week. It is easy to monitor volume. Volume is all very well documented.
Their rooms handle that square footage. To expand, they want to add six more
growing rooms of a similar square footage, at the volumes and batch ratios they
have historically done. That would enables them to build a facility consistent with
what they have. They would keep operating costs in line by not having extra sets
of spare parts for smaller capacity units.
Regarding scale, IMS was producing 2,500 cubic yards per week. The Monies
facility capacity allowed production of 6,000 cubic yards per week, but production
was less than that. The Champ facility can do 4,000 to 5,000 cubic yards per week.
Those are medium size composting operations. Ostrom's produces 400 yards per
week. That is tiny. It would be reasonable to put in aerated floors and a well -
organized wastewater containment system. It makes sense to double production to
800 cubic yards, but put it on air. To go to 1,200 cubic yards per week with a roof
over the facility would be a quarter of the size of the next larger facility.
Sometimes the volume gets lost in the issue. He respects the community's right to
address the problem, but question whether the problem is really there. There are
protections in place already. Explore the option of continuing the emergency
moratorium and get a document that supports his size and scale, and still
addresses the community's issues.
McShane stated the committee just removed the exemption from the design
standards. He asked Mr. Street if he was interested in incorporating design
standards, even if the exemption weren't in place. Street stated he is interested in
some of the design standards, but not all, based on the scale of his production. He
is interested in an aerated floor, at the minimum.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
McShane asked if a 50 percent expansion is not useful, and if Ostrom's wants
to expand to 100 percent. He asked if Ostrom would put everything on an aerated
floor if it expanded. Street stated he could put everything on an aerated floor.
Space is a big issue. Ostrom would put pre- conditioned heaps on air, which
accelerates the composting time and creates better odor.
McShane asked about a bio- filter within an enclosed building with negative
air pressure. Street stated it can be done another way. At a volume of 1,200 cubic
yards per week, they would get a better handle on leachate control. There is little
leachate from the heaps if one is not subject to rainfall. The rainfall on exposed
heaps may create anaerobic conditions, which means the material has to be
handled more, which increases cost. Toxins are a by- product of the anaerobic
process, and they aren't good for the mushroom crop. With a roof, the stormwater
management is less costly and burdensome than managing leachate with rainwater.
It helps tidy up the facility. Then they can cover it with a roof.
McShane asked if expansion to a certain level would make it cost effective to
put the whole thing under a roof, and they might be able to run it through some
sort of filter. Street stated they would use a chimney, not a filter.
Greg Barlean, Hopewell Neighborhood Association, stated a California facility
is creating health problems two miles away. In 2002, Ostrom expanded from 1,500
to 2,200 cubic yards per month. No one knows how to make substrate in an open
air facility without producing the ammonia and sulfide gasses that are produced.
There are mitigation measures, but just running wind rows with aerated floors is
not the answer. Those measures are antiquated. The industry cannot be well -
regulated. The industry has tricks such as the Right -to -Farm Act to avoid
regulation. There is currently a lawsuit between Ostrom's and NWAPA. The tools
the citizens need are indoor facilities and performance standards. The best
available control technology in the world is a closed loop system, which are required
in Europe. It's expensive to do that. Canada didn't want to take that step. Canada
compromised by allowing a facility to do whatever it wants in an enclosed space
and requiring a performance bond. Require a performance bond.
Elizabeth Denny, Glen Echo Neighborhood, stated Mr. Chris Street just said
that putting a roof over substrate production would be good for the production. In
the past, Mr. Street argued there was no reason for putting a roof over substrate
production. That is a contradiction. It's hard to determine the truth.
Bill Street, Ostrom, stated production is a straightforward process. The
quantity of material they make every week in Everson is approximately 380 to 400
cubic yards of finished material. That is all they have ever made. The footprint of
the concrete won't allow them to make more. The confusion is that they shipped
some of the 400 cubic yards to Canada. They replaced that amount of material
from the Lacey farm. Production was never more than 400 yards. The only reason
for an increased odor that he can think of during that time may have been from
loading the trucks. That's the only step that was different.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
He wants to work with the Council and neighbors to come up with a
document that meets the needs of as many concerned parties as possible. The
Right -to -Farm Act could serve a useful purpose. It's been determined through case
law that the process of making compost, which is essential to making mushrooms,
is a farming activity and is afforded the protection of the Right -to -Farm Act.
He and the industry has not been able to find any tangible, scientific
evidence that shows there are public health threats from a composting operation.
He has no intent of operating a business that constantly offends the neighbors. If
the business is doing that, then the compost probably isn't very good anyway. He
wants to do the right thing for their neighbors, but it has to be reasonable.
The technology from Europe is very expensive and is only being done at huge
composting facilities. He would be interested in the ability to expand as driven by
the mushroom market. There is no market for it now. There may be in the future.
Expanding production means making more compost.
(Clerk's Note: McShane left the meeting at 2:27 p.m. Vice -Chair Caskey-
Schreiber continued to chair the meeting.)
Bill Street continued to state that there is no reason today to make compost
for the Canadians. When he did that in the past, they had a choice of either
expanding operations or of selling his product at his price, which was higher. He
didn't spend the money on expansion. He chose to make compost at his Everson
location, shipped it to Canada to access Canadian mushrooms for sale under the
Ostrom label. They replaced the amount of shipped compost with compost from his
Lacey facility. He wants to be able to expand if the market calls for it. He can
expand and install mitigating measures that will make a difference as they expand.
He would take odor - mitigating steps designed to keep the odors under control.
There are 55 to 60 employees whose jobs shouldn't go away. He doesn't
want to absorb extremely high costs for doing things the Council thinks he should
do to control odors. Those measures could be put in place as production increases.
He wants to stay competitive in the market place. If Ostrom's doesn't stay
competitive, it can't last here. He wants to do the right thing for the neighbors and
community. There are ways to do that without getting too deep into prescriptive
technology.
Caskey- Schreiber asked what types of things they do now to mitigate
nuisance odors. Street stated they have old technology right now. He still makes
compost the way most compost is made in North America. At his farm in Lacey,
there were odor complaints, so he installed an aerated pad. It had a dramatic
effect on lowering the odor level.
Caskey- Schreiber stated Ostrom's has tried to be good business people.
They all hope that continues.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Ken Ryan, 7098 Goodwin Road, Everson, stated Mr. Bill Street said he was
taking compost from Lacey.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
Ryan continued to state that Mr. Street may not have been producing more
compost, but was handling double the amount of compost. Ostrom's is polluting at
night and on the weekends. Twice in four months he's been woken up in the
middle of the night.
The Health Department said this is very difficult to monitor. It's difficult for
citizens to have to monitor, too. British Columbia did not allow grandfathering, for
a good reason. Grandfathering was the compromise. There has been too much
compromise. They have had all kinds of problems with Ostrom's, many times on
the weekends. He is in favor of the ordinance, as amended this afternoon.
Brenner moved to amend section 24.12.030, "(f) post performance bond
for an amount to be determined by the Health Department." No one complained
about having to post a performance bond. It seems like a reasonable thing to
require.
Delahunt stated staff chose not to include the option for a performance bond
because they don't require it of any other similar type of operation, such as solid
waste facilities. The regulatory scheme has been permitting and enforcement.
That has always been adequate and appropriate. A performance bond may be
something that is a Canadian system of enforcement.
Crawford stated he doesn't support the motion. It would have to be more
specific. Mr. Carmichael's written comments suggests language for a performance
bond. For the existing compost substrate producer to maintain the status quo, the
County doesn't require the producer to do anything differently other than get a
permit. This would be something new the existing producer would have to do. The
producer would have to put up a bunch of money to do what it is currently doing.
That is not appropriate for an existing business.
Roy stated she won't support the amendment, based on the response of the
Health Department. She could consider it if there were a stronger rationale.
Brenner stated there have been a number of times in the past when it would
have been helpful to have a performance bond for the other types of facilities. Just
because other facilities aren't required doesn't mean it's not right. It would have
been great to have a performance bond requirement in place in other instances.
Delahunt stated that to have a performance bond, they would have to have a
process similar to an enforcement process to collect from the performance bond. If
there were a performance bond, there may be an incentive for a facility to not lose
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
the bond money. However, the process would still take time. Make enforcement
as consistent as possible.
Caskey - Schreiber stated she doesn't support the motion. The performance
bond may have to be very high or it won't be a deterrent. Try it this way. If it
doesn't work, they can tighten it up more.
Motion failed 1 -4 with Brenner in favor and McShane and Nelson
absent.
Crawford referenced section 24.12.020(19). He asked if this regulation
covers the storage, not the production, of mushroom substrate. Hegedus stated
this regulation covers production, not storage or use.
Crawford asked if they can cover storage somehow. Hegedus stated that
would be regulating the farming process. Finished substrate storage and handling
regulation would affect the actual facilities that purchase and farm with it.
Crawford stated the concern is the nuisance odor and how it affects health.
If an existing facility increases its nuisance odor, the perception is an increased
health hazard, and it may not be covered by this ordinance. Hegedus stated there
are compost quality requirements. There is a stability measurement that must be
met. It's a performance standard. Compost substrate should not be actively
composted after it's shipped for usage. His first question would be whether it
meets stability performance standards.
Crawford asked if the product smells, or if the process in making the product
smells. Hegedus stated there is a difference. There is a smell, but a finished
product doesn't give off the gasses of a compost process.
Crawford asked if an increase in the movement of compost that Mr. Street
described could add to the perception of odor to the neighbors. Hegedus stated it
may, but it would be hard to quantify.
(Clerk's Note: Councilmember McShane returned to the meeting.)
Fleetwood stated the primary health and safety component is the
performance standards. They may be the most stringent in the nation. That's
what's enforceable. Design and operation components are in furtherance of the
performance standards, whether or not there is an exemption for expansion.
McShane stated there were questions about design standards. He hoped
consideration would be given to an exemption with some design standards still
being required. Give an existing facility the opportunity to improve.
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Roy stated the end result is the performance standards. Design standards
are like best practices. The design standards are the best way to get to those
performance standards. She is reluctant to give up best management practices.
McShane stated he will attempt to introduce it tonight, as amended, and
schedule a public hearing in two weeks or more.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 2:53 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
The Council approved these minutes on October 26_, 2004.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dan McShane, Council Chair
Special Board of Health - Mushroom Substrate Production Rules, 10/12/2004, Page 12