CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET

Page 5 of 14 such as improper containment of contaminants and inadequate housekeeping practices. • Expired permits, including the facility’s Temporary Use Permit and its Stormwater Industrial General Permit. As a result of these findings, in March 2025, LPFD—acting as the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for both Livermore and Pleasanton—issued a consent order to PGS. The order included fines and required PGS to retain an Environmental Health and Safety professional or consultant, as well as establish and maintain employee training programs on hazardous waste handling. The persistence of both the franchise agreement and transfer station compliance issues reflects a broader pattern of management not adequately addressing critical reporting, operational, and regulatory requirements. The City has a responsibility to ensure that all reporting and compliance obligations are met to remain in compliance with state law. Failure to comply could carry significant financial and regulatory risks. The City is evaluated annually for SB 1383 compliance, and if found to be in violation during a CalRecycle review, it could face administrative civil penalties ranging from $7,500 to $10,000 or more per day, per violation. Similarly, violations under CUPA or the State Water Resources Control Board can result in fines of up to $25,000 per day per violation. Regardless of the specific actions taken to address noise, odor, traffic, and stormwater concerns at the current Transfer Station, the related capital costs will be substantial (tens of millions of dollars). Infrastructure and Capital Investment Needs The transfer station has supported the City’s solid waste operations and provided a location for the public to dispose of materials for many years. However, current conditions, including unresolved compliance matters, site constraints, and land use concerns, have prompted long- term facility planning and evaluation of alternatives. Significant capital improvements, estimated in the tens of millions of dollars, will be required to upgrade the existing transfer station and address operational and neighborhood impacts. Relocating to a new site would involve even greater costs and permitting risks. A study conducted by SCS Engineers on behalf of the City estimated a low- and high-range cost of $10,000,000 to $23,000,000 to relocate the existing facility. However, this range does not include land acquisition or site-specific factors that would increase costs, such as extensive excavation, rock removal, retaining wall construction, or additional utility infrastructure for power and water. PGS estimates a potential cost range of $50,000,000 to $100,000,000, including land acquisition. PGS has provided a preliminary proposal concept stating that upgrades to the existing facility could be completed within two to four years, whereas a new facility would likely take six to ten years, contingent upon land acquisition, permitting, and other infrastructure development for a new site. Modifying the existing facility could address near-term needs. However, further analysis is needed to determine the extent to which such mitigations could serve as a longer-term or permanent solution, especially given the proximity of new residential development to the current site. If, after investing in upgrades to the existing Page 77 of 399