Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09251990 - IO.6 C( I.O.-6 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS st Contra FROM: f \ Costa INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE County DATE: September 24, 1990 SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE PROPOSED FORMATION OF A TASK FORCE ON COMPOST SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Create a Task Force on Compost as a technically oriented group to be integrated with the Source Reduction and Recycling Committee of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force which can advise the Integrated Waste Management Task Force and, through the Task Force, the Board of Supervisors on issues regarding composting as a method of recycling and reducing the volume of solid waste which must be disposed of to landfills. 2. The Task Force on Compost should be composed of the following types of organizations: A. Representatives of industries which produce products from organic material, such as Proctor and Gamble. B. University and extension service experts. C. Waste collection service and disposal facilities ' operators. D. A representative from each operator of a transfer station in the County. E. Agricultural organizations. F. Public service organizations. G. Park/recreation, land development, and other potential user groups. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -;WS SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOAR COMMITTEE APPROVETHER SIGNATURES: SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK TOM POWERS ACTION OF BOARD ON September 25, 199U APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS _ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. � / ` CC: Community Development Director ATTESTE !4 D" aJ, /f Ao County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY M382 (10/88) .. -2- H. The Source Reduction. and Recycling Committee of the County Integrated Waste Management Task Force. 3 . The work program for the Task Force on Compost should include the following: A. How should composting be phased in? B. Who should do the composting ( transfer station or landfill) ? C. What items should be composted? D. Can Markets for composting be developed in a reasonable time? The focus of this effort should be to assist those solid waste facilities which have Conditions of Approval addressing composting to implement those Conditions in a timely manner. 4. The Task Force on Compost should be staffed by the Community Development Department. The Community Development Director should be directed to return to the Board of Supervisors on October 9, 1990 with the names of proposed members for such a Task Force. 5. Request the Task Force or Community Development Director to make progress reports to our Committee on October 22, 1990 and November 26, 1990 regarding the work of the Task Force and request the Task Force to make a final report to our Committee by December 15, 1990, on the Acme Transfer Station portion of their assignment. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors on April 17, 1990, approved a recommendation originated by the Plastics Recycling Task Force that a Task Force on Compost be established and that the matter be referred to staff, the Environmental Affairs Committee, Internal Operations Committee and Solid Waste Commission for comments. The Environmental Affairs Committee concluded that a Task Force on Compost should assist the AB 939 process. The Solid Waste Commission recommended that the Board of Supervisors delegate the role of the Task Force on Compost to the Integrated Waste Management Task Force. When our Committee originally made its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on August 21, 1990, the Board of Supervisors deferred action on our recommendations until September 18 , 1990 and asked the Integrated Waste Management Task Force to comment on our recommendations. When the matter was discussed at the Board of Supervisors on September 18, 1990 the Integrated Waste Management Task Force had not had an opportunity to act on the recommendations of its committee on Administration. As a result, the subject was referred back to our Committee to hear on September 24, 1990 and we were asked to report the matter back to the Board of Supervisors on September 25, 1990. On September 19, ' 1990 the Integrated Waste Management Task Force acted on the recommendations of its committee on Administration, as is reflected in the attached memorandum from Catherine Kutsuris dated September 19, 1990 . We met with the Chair of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force, Avon Wilson; a representative of the Acme Transfer Station -3- and staff from the Community Development Department on September 24, 1990. We reviewed the recommendations of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force along with the recommendations which had been formulated in our earlier report and have combined them into the above recommendations, which appear to have the endorsement of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force. Attached as additional background information is Mr. Zahn' s memorandum of June 11, 1990, the Solid Waste Commission's report of July 20, 1990 and the September 19, 1990 recommendations of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO:. Internal Operations Committee DATE: June 11, 1990 Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak Supervisor Tom Powers FROM: Charles.. A. Zahn Assistant Director SUBJECT: Staff Report on Board of Supervisors' Proposal to Establish a Task Force on Compost ALTERNATIVES In the context that a) Contra Costa County , and the cities are obligated by AB 939 to develop Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (as components of County Integrated Waste Management Plans) between January 1, and July 1, 1991; b) that composting must be a significant means of recycling in these plans and, c) that the local Integrated Waste Management Plans are already being prepared under the guidance of the .Integrated Waste Management Task Force ' established by the Board of Supervisors, the Board's primary alternatives for establishing a Task Force for Compost appear to be: -.- 1. Establish a Task Force on Compost with a Countywide scope of interest. To avoid duplication of effort, a task force with this role should assist the County Integrated Waste Management Task Force (IWMTF) . In this capacity it would advise County government in the preparation of AB 939 plan components for the unincorporated area as well . as advise the cities. Its creation would require the County I;%MTF's concurrence and cooperation. The Board's proposal has not been referred to the County IWMTF -- which did not hold its first meeting until May 16th. 1 c If the Board wishes to establish a task force addressing composting throughout the County.., the Board should arrange (through staff) for the matter to be placed on the County IWMTF's agenda for consideration, and a Board representative should present it to the task force. This might be done in time for the task force's July 2-0th meeting. 2. Delegate the '-Task Force on Compost role to the County Integrated ,Waste Management Task Force. The Board of Supervisors could defer to, the County IWMTF, or more positively, ask the County IWMTF -to consider and report on specific composting matters. If the Board wishes to pursue this alternative, it should advise the County IWMTF -of its intention, develop a proposal by, say August, and have a Board representative present it to the AB 939 Task Force. 3. Establish a Task Force on Compost with an unincorporated area . scope of interest. The Board of Supervisors could establish a Task Force on Compost to advise on the development of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (AB 939 plan) for the unincorporated area. - The - Task Force could provide specialized advice on wastestream components which are prominent in the unincorporated area wastestream, such as agricultural wastes and, .possibly, Delta water hyacinth dredgings. If the Board wishes to establish its own Task-.- Force on Compost, it could direct staff to propose a composition and work program for Board consideration. BACKGROUND The Board of Supervisors, on April 17, 1990, approved' a recommendation originated by the Plastics Recycling Task Force and brought to the Board by Supervisors McPeak and. Powers that a Task Force on Compost be established, and that the matter be referred to staff, the Environmental: Affairs Committee, and the County Solid Waste Commission for comment. The referral was discussed by the EAC at its May 14 , 1990, meeting but it arrived too late to` be scheduled on the County Solid Waste Commission's May agenda. The Environmental Affairs Committee concluded that a Task Force on Compost should assist . the AB 939 process. 2 TASK FORCE COMPOSITION If your Committee wishes to recommend that the Board establish a Task Force on Compost,, staff recommends that it be- a sub-committee of the AB 939 program and that its composition reflect the model used for Plastics Recycling Task Force (which was established prior to AB 939) . A-Task Force on Compost could be composed of members of government who have the statutory obligation to comply with AB 939, members who can contribute scientific and technical expertise, and members who can be instrumental in implementing the resulting plan. (The roles are not mutually exclusive; for example, representatives of the solid waste industry would have expertise and the ability to realize plans.) A Task Force on Compost could include the following representatives: 1. A County Supervisor (and other local elected officials if the task force is Countywide) . 2. University and extension service experts. 3. Waste collection service and disposal facilities, operators. 4. Agricultural organizations. 5. Public service organizations. 6. Park/recreation, land development, and other potential users groups. Consideration should.be given to appointing a number of members who are not already committed to AB 939 and related work. Staff and some consultant services to the task force could be provided under a combination of the AB 939 program (for planning) and the Recycling Action Plan program recently authorized by the Board. ISSUES Whether composting will be formally studied and included in local government plans -- and even put .into effect -- in the short-term are not issues. The resource recovery requirements and objectives of Assembly Bill 939 , which went into effect on January 1, 1990, have set a process in motion which involves every county and city in the state. Composting will be a practical necessity to meet the AB 939 objectives of reducing the wastestream by 25% by the year 1995 and, particularly, of making a 50% reduction by the year 2000 because of the large proportion of compostable materials in solid :paste. Furthermore, the Land Use Permit requirements for the Acne transfer station and 'Iarsh Canyon landfill (and proposed for the 3 Keller Canyon Landfill) obligate those facilities to undertake composting activities -- this year in the case of the Acme transfer station. The Richmond Sanitary Service has also initiated a proposal for a transfer station project which, they have indicated, will involve composting. - The basic issues pertaining to composting and appropriate to be addressed by a task force are identified below. They are inter- related. 1. How should composting be phased-in? Currently, we have an; inadequate understanding of our wastestream's composition (which is why AB 939 programs begin with composition studies) , of what and how much is compostable. We need to come to grips with processes and costs. And, we need markets and uses for the materials. 2. Who should do the composting? We expect large-scale 'composting to be done at transfer stations, and some to be done at landfills. Do we want to encourage competing specialized composting facilities? How large roles do we want ; (can we expect) backyard, farm, and other on-site operations to perform? 3. What should be composted? High-quality compost, for example for use in food growing, requires high-quality in-put material. Common base materials such as treated woods, sprayed landscape materials, and contaminated sludges could produce contaminated compost. Lower quality ` compost would have limited landscaping applications. Should wood waste, for which there is a market as a fuel, be directed to composting, which lacks a- market, because AB 939 does -not give short-term credit for the use of salvaged wood as "fuel?" 4. Can markets for compost be developed in a reasonable time? Supply outpacing demand is a frequent problem when economic changes are accelerated. The current oversupplies of recycled newsprint and glass are examples. A -task force could focus on implementation and market development. CAZ:jal j150: ioc.mem CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: Internal Operations Committee DATE: July 20, 1990 Supervisor Sunne MCPeak, Chair Supervisor Tom Powers J . FROM: Solid Waste Commission 4 SUBJECT: Recommendation on Compost Task Force On April 17, 1990, the Board of Supervisors referred the issue of the formation of a Task Force on Compost to the Internal Operations Committee, Environmental Affairs Committee and Solid Waste Commission (SWC) . The SWC, discussed this referral and recommends that the Board delegate the Task Force on Compost role to the County Integrated Waste. Management Task Force. The Commissioners believe that this alternative would most efficiently serve the County's needs by having all recycling and source reduction planning efforts under one.*body. RV:jal jl54: ioc.mem CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: September 19, 1990 FILE: R-52C TO: Ctaude Van Marter, Assistant County.Administrator FROM: ' Catherine Kutsuris, Senior Planner z SUBJECT: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REFERRAL REGARDING THE PROPOSED COMPOSTING TASK FORCE This memorandum is in response to the Internal Operations Committee referral to the Integrated Waste Management Task Force regarding the proposal for a Composting Task Force. The Integrated Waste Management Task Force considered this item at their September 19, 1990 meeting and forwards the following recommendations: 1. The proposed Composting Task Force should be integrated with the Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Task Force to ensure that there is not a duplication of efforts and that solid waste issues are coordinated under the umbrella of the Integrated Waste Management Task Force. This is especially true in the case of composting which, under Assembly Bill 939, is a mandated component of the city and County plans. 2. The Board of Supervisors should appoint additional technically oriented representatives to join with the Source Reduction and Recycling Committee to address the composting issues. The proposed representatives from the Community Development Department's June 11, 1990 memorandum seem appropriate. These include University and extension service experts, waste collection service and disposal facility operators, agricultural organizations, public service organizations, and park/recreation agencies. Since the Composting Committee's report would be made through the Task Force to the Board of Supervisors, additional elected officials are not considered to be necessary. The Task Force understood that the work program of the Composting Task would include: 1. How should composting be phased in? 2. Who should do the composting (transfer station/landfill)? 3. What items should be composted? 4. Can.markets for composting be developed in a reasonable time? The Task Force understood that the focus of this effort would be was to assist those solid waste facilities which have Conditions of Approval addressing composting to implement those Conditions in a timely manner. The Task Force would like to assure the Committee that they.can return to the Board of Supervisors with a report within the timeline set by the Board. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at extension 4195. Contra Costa County RECEIVED CK:gms 939:CompstTF.CAO 'LP ;?Q 199 Office of County Administrator