By Julie BUTCHER

The controversial, long-awaited preliminary environmental review of a project proposed to produce renewable energy from the gas produced by the Scholl Canyon landfill was released this week, subject to a 90-day comment period to solicit input and feedback.

The draft environmental impact report (EIR) is available for review and comment at http://glendalebiogasgeneration.com/#draft-eir.

In 2018, the Glendale City Council approved plans to construct a 12-megawatt power-generation facility on the site that would transform landfill gas into renewable energy using anaerobic digestion, a treatment process, to break down organic waste into methane, or biogas, to generate electric energy.

According to a staff report, the proposal would also include construction of two 1,000 square-foot office buildings, a 60,000-gallon fire water tank, a 10,000-gallon water storage tank, a natural-gas pipeline system, four 840-square-foot engine generator enclosures with 40-foot-tall exhaust stacks, a 40-foot-tall flare stack, and a 384-square-foot power distribution center.

In November 2018 it was reported that “methane gas from decaying trash at the Scholl Canyon landfill in the hills above Eagle Rock is being ‘flared,’ or burned off. Contrary to common belief, the methane is no longer being used to make electricity at the Grayson Power Plant in Glendale.

“From an environmental point of view, flaring is the worst way to deal with methane gas. Flaring causes pollution and releases emissions that contribute to global warming. Flaring is also wasteful because it literally burns up landfill gas that could be used to generate energy,” said newly elected city councilman Dan Brotman. “Mr. [Steve] Zurn [Glendale Water and Power manager] said flaring began in April. Before that, the gas was transported by pipeline to Grayson and used as a fuel source to generate electricity. Mr. Zurn said the methane is being flared because the Grayson plant is getting too old to efficiently process the gas. He pointed out that flaring has been used at Scholl Canyon in the past during maintenance and as emergency back-up and was common until about the mid-1990s.”

“It’s not what I’d like to do with the gas. I’d like to put it to beneficial use, whatever that beneficial use may be,” responded Zurn at the time, adding that he hoped the EIR would address those concerns.

Currently, methane gas released at landfills can be put in an internal combustion engine or turbine, or it can be flared. Legally, it must be controlled in one of those three ways, Zurn said.

Concerns have been raised over the project’s potential to contribute to poor air quality, increased traffic, dust and noise in nearby neighborhoods as well as concerns about the potential for an environmental disaster because of the landfill’s proximity to the Verdugo fault line.

At a meeting of the Glendale planning commission in March 2018, most of the 129 comment cards were from those opposing the project including members of the Coalition for Eagle Rock Beautiful, Glendale Environmental Coalition, Glenoaks Canyon Homeowners Association, and the East Area Progressive Democrats, a northeast Los Angeles political group that advocates for environmental justice.

“We created a community opposition that surfaced in Eagle Rock and then Glendale to create a multi-jurisdiction opposition to the dump,” said Hans Johnson, president of East Area Progressive Democrats. “It’s a rather remarkable result and victory for the breadth of community resistance to the dump expansion.”

Johnson and Glenoaks Canyon resident Adam Starr penned an opinion piece in January 2016 summing up the history.

“Glendale’s original Joint Powers Agreement with LA County, which established the dump in 1961 states that the ‘County’s rights to use City property shall be for 17 years . . . or until such property has served its purpose and shall have been completely filled as herein specified, whichever first occurs, whereupon all rights of District and County shall terminate.’ This means the dump should actually have closed in the late 1970s.

“Abiding by the original intent of the Joint Powers Agreement and closing the Scholl Canyon dump is not an obstacle, but an opportunity. Glendale can be an example not only to California, but to the country, demonstrating innovation and sensitivity to protecting both its own and nearby residents and the environment with smarter, less polluting waste solutions that conform with the city’s zero-waste policy.

“We urge the Glendale City Council to take dump expansion off the table. Focus instead on safer, forward-thinking waste policy. That’s solid ground.”

“At the end of the day, the residents matter more than the commissioners,” [Planning Commissioner Leonard] Manoukian said at the planning commission meeting. “The residents matter more than the city staff, with all due respect. And because of that, Mr. Chairman, I would vote to deny the mitigated negative report, and would ask that you seriously consider doing an EIR, to provide the residents with the level of scrutiny that they seem to be wanting.”

Glendale’s planning commission voted to require the detailed scrutiny of a full environmental review rather than accepting the assurances of a mitigated negative declaration, a considerably less complete level of analysis and review.

In September 2019, Glendale officials announced that they were abandoning plans to expand operations at the Scholl Canyon landfill. City officials notified the Los Angeles County sanitation districts in May 2018 that Glendale was no longer looking to increase the size of the 535-acre facility, Glendale city spokeswoman Eliza Papazian said in an email.

Marla Nelson, president of Coalition for Scholl Landfill Alternatives, opposes “the flaring of methane at the landfill and the $35 million Biogas Power Plant which Glendale Water and Power wants to build at the site.” Nelson would like to see the methane used for fuel cells instead of a power plant.

Alternatives proposed by the coalition include options to:

• Use fuel cells in a biogas-to-energy process, which would create fewer emissions than the planned biogas plant. This option is being developed at the Coyote Canyon Landfill in Newport Beach.

• Convert the methane into liquefied natural gas and use it for vehicle fuel. This method is currently in operation in Perris and at the Altamont Sanitary Landfill in Livermore.

• Get rid of the impurities in the landfill methane so that it can be injected directly into a utility company’s “Common Carrier” pipeline. Southern California Gas Company has a pipeline near the landfill that could accept the methane if it is purified.

• Segregate carbon dioxide from the methane and sell it for use in industrial processes.

The draft EIR is being reviewed by current Glendale councilmembers along with the public.

Councilmember Ardashes “Ardy” Kassakhian said, “I’m not for keeping the landfill open for any longer than its lifespan was supposed to allow for. However, there is gas that is generated from the waste and we have to figure out what to do with it, either burning it off or utilizing it for energy generation as the city did in the past. Whatever happens, it has to have the buy-in of the neighboring residents and take into consideration their safety.”

“I’m still reading through the voluminous documents and the City is still taking public comment, so I’m not ready to come down on the side of any specific project alternative,” responded Councilman Brotman in an email. “I’ll say the obvious though: the dump is producing dirty methane and there are no great options for handling it. This is why we need to get away from landfilling as a solution to our throw away society. Unfortunately, we are stuck with the legacy of this dump, so we need to do something. I will support whichever option is least environmentally harmful and poses the least fire, noise and air quality risk to Glenoaks Canyon residents. I’ll also want to ensure that nothing we do creates incentives for the dump to be expanded or the site to be industrialized in any way. Profit and/or clean energy credits should not be a deciding factor. It has to be all about public health and safety.”

He added that the “next step is that public comments are incorporated into a final EIR and then Council votes to certify it (or not). Certify means certify that the EIR was done properly according to CEQA. Voting to actually approve one or another project alternative comes after that.”

Those who would like to provide written comments can send to Erik Krause, Deputy Director of Community Development, City of Glendale, Community Development Dept., 633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, 91206-4386; fax (818) 240-0392 or email ekrause@glendaleca.gov. Comments must be received prior to the close of the 90-day public review period at 5 p.m. on Sept. 30.

  Julie BUTCHER