Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05201986 - 2.1 (2) To BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: t wtra Phil Batchelor, County Administrator C. DATE : rt Co May 15, 1986 WUI Ity SUBJECT; Solid Waste Policy Statements and Recommendations SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION Approve the recommendations of the Solid Waste Commission pertaining to adoption of attached Solid Waste Management Policy Statements, Specific Solid Waste Recommendations, and Issues Needing More Study. BACKGROUND On April 22, 1986, the Board referred to the County Administrator for review and recommendation a report from the Solid Waste Commission dated March 14, 1986 transmitting certain Solid Waste Management Policy Statements, Specific Solid Waste Recommendations, and Issues Needing More Study by the Solid Waste Commission. These statements have been in preparation for some period of time and have now been circulated to cities, sanitary districts and the private solid waste industry for review and comment as directed by the Board. These statements incorporate suggestions resulting from circulation of the proposed policy among the concerned parties. The County Administrator' s Office has further examined these proposed statements and concurs with the recommendations of the Solid Waste Commission relating to adoption of the attached "Solid Waste Management Policy Statements" and the attached "Specific Solid Waste Recommendations, " and also referral back to the Solid Waste Commission of the "Issues Needing More Study by the Solid Waste Commission. " i CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE S : MAY 2 U 1985 ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _� OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE 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. County Administrator MAY 20 1986 cc: Community Development Director ATTESTED _ Solid Waste Commission via CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF County Counsel SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Health Services Director/Env. Health M382/7-83 BY ,DEPUTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY STATEMENTS These policy statements are to provide guidance and direction to solid waste management planning and decision-making. The policy statements are meant to maintain and enhance not only the physical environment, but also the economic, sociological , community image , and similar quality of life values. Other policies may be added in the future as the Solid Waste Commission and the Board of Super- visors further deliberate solid waste issues . 1 . LANDFILL WITHIN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 14 A landfill within the boundaries of Contra Costa County is necessary to guarantee that the County's wastes can be disposed of without requiring the approval of a jurisdiction outside the County, to minimize transportation and disposal costs , and so that County residents are not subject to waste import surcharges from other jurisdictions. It will be necessary for the cities , sanitary districts , and the Board of Supervisors to work together in order to make the difficult economic and environmental compromises that will be necessary in order to site the needed landfills . 2. NUMBER OF LANDFILLS Contra Costa County should have more than one landfill in the future so as to: A. Share the risk and impact of solid waste disposal as equitably as is practical . B. Reduce the future risk of running out of landfill capacity. C. Minimize the distance that solid waste is hauled in the County. D. Create competition in pricing to ensure a fair disposal fee. 3. LANDFILL CAPACITY Additional landfill capacity is needed as soon as possible in Contra Costa County. New landfills should have a minimum capacity to handle half the County' s total wastestream for at least 20 years. Siting efforts should continue until additional landfill capacity is available to handle all of the County solid wastestream for a minimum of 50 years. After this capacity is attained the remaining capacities of landfills in Contra Costa County should be closely monitored and if the sum of all capacities results in less than 50 years of capacity for all of the County' s solid wastestream, new landfill siting efforts and/or expansion proposals should start immediately. 4. RESOURCE RECOVERY Solid waste resource recovery (including recycling, composting, and waste- to-energy) should be encouraged so as to extend the 1 ife of sanitary .land- fills, reduce the environmental impact of solid waste disposal , and make use of a valuable resource provided that specific resource recovery programsare economically and environmentally desirable. An analysis of costsand benefits of a resource recovery project should include indirect benefits (such as landfill diversion credits, collection cost savings , etc. ) . 5 . PRICING Fees for collection, transport, and disposal of sol id waste should be reasonable to the consumer but should be sufficient to provide a fair rate of return in the case where the system is operated by private industry. When competition is not sufficient to assure fair and equitable fees , then regulation shall be developed by the responsible public agencies to protect the public interest. Under all circumstances , solid waste facilities must continuously fund all environmental protection measures, including closure costs . 6. MANDATORY COLLECTION/SUBSCRIPTION Mandatory subscription to solid waste collection service should be implemented countywide. Mandatory subscription to collection service would help reduce sol id waste storage problems and result in a healthier and attractive community. Mandatory subscription may also result in traffic reductions at landfills. Mandatory subscription will be of greater importance when existing landfills close and new landfills are located further away from most communities . Mandatory subscription should be enforced to ensure wastes are actually collected and that residents are subscribing to an adequate level of service. 7. INNOVATION Innovative solid waste collection and disposal measures should be encouraged. The private sector should keep abreast of these innovations and implement appropriate ones. Government agencies , which regulate these operations, should encourage innovation by making them financially attractive to the private sector and rewarding innovative measures which reduce overall costs, or have other environmental benefits . 8. COUNTYWIDE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Solid waste disposal capacity should be considered in County and city planning activities along with other utility elements , such as sewer and water service. x SPECIFIC SOLID WASTE RECOMMENDATIONS LANDFILLS 1. All sanitary landfills shall submit regular (at least once every two years) topographic maps of landfill sites for volume estimation to determine fill rates and landfill capacity. Z. All new sanitary landfills shal l have scales at the landfill to weigh incoming waste. 14 3. Approved transportation routes to landfills shall be included in permits for landfills in order order to identify preferred access routes to the landfill to reduce traffic impacts on communities adjacent to, and along, the access routes to landfills . 4. Landfill operators shall be required to clean up litter and debris along the access roads to landfills . 5. All landfills (new and existing) shall submit closure plans to the County for review. Closure plans should include the following: A. The proposed final configuration of the landfill site with 10-foot or less contours . B. An estimate of the remaining capacity (in cubic yards) of the site from a specified date and when the site is expected to reach capacity. C. A description of anticipated use of the site after closure. D. A description of financial assurances for closure and post-closure maintenance as required by state regulations . 6. All landfills shall use the best practicable technology to minimize all adverse environmental impacts . Effective environmental controls should be implemented to control the following impacts including, but not limited to: A. Leachate control G. Traffic B . Landfill gas migration control H. Noise C . Control of odor production D. Control of vectors E. Control of birds F. Minimization of adverse aesthetic impacts 7. Resolve the capacity and expansion estimates for the Contra Costa Waste Sanitary Landfill . Approvals for expansion of the landfill identified in the 1982 County Solid Waste Management Plan have not been acquired. In order to determine the remaining life of the landfill , this issue must be resolved. TRANSFER STATIONS 1. The private sector should submit a detailed schedule concerning implementation of transfer stations in the County to the Solid Waste Commission. Particular emphasis should be on a Central/South County transfer station. 2. The feasibility and practicality of interim transfer stations, that may be used instead of, or preceding, permanent transfer stations , should be evaluated by the private sector and be reported to the Solid Waste Commission. 3 . A preliminary decision concerning large scale resource recovery (such as waste-to-energy) should be made before a transfer station is developed because having a separate resource recovery facility and a transfer station in the same area is unnecessary. A large scale resource recovery project would attract the same types of waste as a transfer station and "processes" the waste for transportation to a disposal site. A decision should be made earlier in the planning process concerning the need for both projects so that facilities are not constructed unnecessarily. 4. P1an.ning should continue for a West County transfer station so that the facility can be in operation when the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill reaches capacity. 5 . Planning should start immediately for a Central/South County transfer station. 6. App.ro,ved transportation routes to transfer stations shall be included in permits for transfer stations in order to identify preferred access routes to the transfer station to reduce traffic impacts on communities adjacent to , and along, the access routes to transfer stations . MISCELLANEOUS 1 . Dis-cussion should start with other Bay Area counties, concerning remaining landfill capacity and future options . Many Bay Area counties are facing similar problems concerning both short-term and long-term disposal capacity needs. As development encroaches into previously unoccupied areas , suitable locations for future, long-term sanitary landfills may be limited. It may b,e appropriate for counties to individually, or collectively, reserve areas for long-term disposal . There are also other issues where cooperation can be beneficial , especially in resource recovery matters . 2. Landfill operators should be required to submit regular reports to the Community Development Department on the amount of incoming waste by broad categories , such as: residential /commercial , industrial , and construction/ demolition. This basic information is necessary in order to plan for transfer stations and resource recovery projects , including recycling. It is also important to know this information �to estimate remaining landfill capacities . 3. Better information on the cost of various components of solid waste disposal is necessary. Currently, only rough estimate's of the cost " of the various components of solid waste management (collection, transport, and disposal ) are known. In order to plan the necessity and need for future facilities , information on costs are very important. Additionally, in evaluating resource recovery projects , it is important to consider existing costs compared to cost with the proposed project. 'Standardized "planning level " costs can be obtained without jeopardizing the proprietary interests of ;the private solid waste companies . 4. The Solid Waste Commission should be authorized to sponsor meetings where franchising agencies can share information concerning solid waste collection. With the numerous cities and sanitary districts which franchise solid waste collection , it is appropriate that information on administering franchises and other aspects of franchising be shared. This avoids the duplication of effort and would aid in an equitable rate system for the residents in the County. i ISSUES NEEDING MORE STUDY BY SOLID WASTE COMMISSION I . A policy on control and ownership of the solid wastestream should be de- veloped. The public sector needs to control the wastestream in order to assure coordinated solid waste planning. The private sector also needs to be assured of a guaranteed wastestream in order to finance facilities such as transfer stations, landfills, and resource recovery projects. Both needs and concerns need to be recognized . 2. A reasonable import policy should be developed in order to insure that solid waste imports from other counties are not adversely affecting Contra Costa County residents . This should be done in 'conjunction with cooperation regionally, to insure that the region has adequate landfill capacity. The terms, conditions, and mitigations of imports into the County should be clearly stated. There must be recognition of existing contractual commitments for waste imports. 3. A policy on compensating "host communities" adversely affected by solid waste facilities should be developed. 4. The Solid Waste Commission should determine the need and desirability of requiring new landfills to meet the requirements of a Class II facility. Class II facilities provide additional safeguards (in addition to those needed for Class III) against groundwater and surface water contamination. It may be prudent for the County to require these additional safeguards. Since Class II facilities can also accept designated waste , and there is a need for disposal capacity for designated waste in Contra Costa County, Class II facilities are needed. 5 . More discussion on implementing recycling and composting programs is needed. The Board of Supervisors has approved $30,000 for planning recycling and composting programs. 6. The Solid Waste Commission should develop a policy concerning the necessity and desirability of requiring that only transfer vehicles be . allowed at new landfills to reduce traffic impacts. This should result in several transfer stations throughout the County. 7. Based on the above policy, the necessity and need for an East County transfer station should be determined. 8. The Board' s Recycling Committee has recommended that the Commission consider recommending to the Board of Supervisors that a condition be placed on new landfill sites only allowing the landfills to accept wastes from communities that have curbside collection recycling programs . DBOcl swm.pol .stmts.t4