Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05181993 - H.2 (5) 1 ' RECYCLING COMPONENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION I: GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES 2 A. Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 B. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 2 C. Policies for Meeting Goals and Objectives: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ' SECTION II: SUMMARY OF SELECTED PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A. Short-Term Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ' B. Medium-Term Programs 6 SECTION III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . A. Market Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : . . . . . : . . 7 B. Recycling as Community Development 8 C. Source Separated vs. Commingled Collection: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 D. The County's Role in Program Planning and Implementation . . . . . . . . 10 SECTION IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS 12 ' A. CoSWMP Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 B. Existing Recycling Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 SECTION V. MATERIALS SELECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 A. Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 B. Materials Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 VI. RECYCLING PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A. Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . 25 B. Program Evaluation Criteria and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . 27 C. Comparative Evaluations of Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 D. Program Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 E. Projected Diversion From Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 VII. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION . . . . . . . 41 i VIII. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 i e LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 5-1: Closed Loop and Linear Recycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Table 5-2: Recycling Programs Evaluation Table . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 30 .Table 5-6: Residential Programs: Short Term Capture and Recycling Rates . . . . . . 36 Table 5-7: Residential Programs: Medium Term Capture and Recycling Rates . . . . 37 Table 5-8: Commercial Programs: Short Term Capture and Recycling Rates . . . . . . 38 Table 5-9: Commercial Programs: Medium Term Capture and Recycling Rates . . . . 39 Table 5-10: Industrial Programs: Short Term Capture and Recycling Rates. . . . . . . . 40 Table 5-11: Industrial Programs: Medium Term Capture and Recycling Rates . . . . . 40 Table 5-12 Summary of Program Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Table 5-13: Recycling Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 ii , ' RECYCLING COMPONENT ' INTRODUCTION Recycling can be expected to contribute high diversion levels through a variety of programs. The County already has a wide array of recycling programs, with many more in the planning or pilot stage of development. A relatively high recycling rate can be achieved for the unincorporated area simply by maximizing participation in these programs. Furthermore, by planning, implementing, and expanding recycling programs to recover other materials, and by targeting other sources of recyclable materials, the County will be able to achieve sufficient levels of diversion through a combination of recycling, composting, and source reduction to comply with both short term and medium term mandates. Recycling is maturing as a waste management option, with increasingly sophisticated and proven collection and processing technologies, and better understood benefits and cost parameters. In recent years, the waste hauling industry has joined recycling businesses and non-profit organizations in providing an expanding network of recycling programs and processes. At the same time, more people are accepting the feasibility and importance of recycling, while the institutional changes necessary to enable high levels of recycling are proceeding apace. Contra Costa County is fortunate in being located in an area with excellent access to both foreign and domestic markets for secondary materials. Many processors and end-users of materials are located within the Bay Area, and the region's role as a rail, road, and shipping hub provides ready access to remote markets throughout the United States and the Pacific Rim. Nevertheless, the rapid expansion of the supply of many recycled materials, combined with the " relatively slow response of industries to increase capacity and demand:for these materials, have led ' to unstable and weak prices for secondary materials. Market development is therefore a crucial link to assure the future of recycling programs. Market development can take the form of increasing access to existing markets, increasing demand for finished products, and creating new markets for irecovered materials. During the short term planning period, the County will put most of its resources into developing new ' landfill capacity and expanding recycling programs.' The County will develop and implement source reduction programs in the short term, but will not expect them to be fully effective or to achieve significant, quantifiable diversion until the medium.term planning period. • This component details the specific goals, objectives, policies and programs necessary to improve ' and expand recycling in unincorporated areas of the County. Itis written in accordance with AB 939 and the regulations promulgated by the'California Integrated Waste Management Board. This Component is organized as follows: April 1993 S'- 1 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Section I: Goals, Objectives, and Policies Section II: Summary of Selected Programs r Section III: General Considerations Section IV: Existing Conditions , Section V: Materials Selection Section VI: Evaluation of Program Alternatives ' Section VII: Programs Selected, Monitoring and Evaluation Section VIII: Program Implementation SECTION I: GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES A. Goals Contra Costa County's recycling goals for the unincorporated areas are to: 1. Achieve the highest feasible recycling rate, through the development and institution of a variety of programs; 2. Develop and strengthen markets for recycled and reusable materials; , 3. Design recycling programs that directly and explicitly involve waste generators; that produce the purest, most marketable products; and that serve the broader development needs of the community. 4. Develop recycling programs that educate and involve residential, commercial, and industrial generators. 5. To the maximum extent feasible, coordinate with adjacent communities' recycling programs, criteria for determining the relative recyclability of materials, and market development programs,-in order to avoid duplication of efforts and to ensure minimum cost to rate payers. ' 6. Foster a partnership approach to handling solid waste issues between local government groups, solid waste industry, recycling businesses, newly developing businesses, and non- ' profit organizations, with the aim of providing cost-effective, environmentally sound recycling programs. B. Objectives Objectives include the targeted numerical diversion rate for the short-term and medium-term planning periods, and short term and medium-term market development objectives. Contra Costa County S- 2 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 1. Quantitative Diversion Objectives:- ' The quantitative goals of the recycling component are to achieve a short-term recycling rate of 20% (approximately triple present rates), and a medium term recycling rate of 3.5 These rates include current diversion levels (see tables of targeted materials). 2. Qualitative Market Development Objectives: rThe short and medium term market development objectives are as follows: Short Term: a. Achieve relative stability in markets for recycled materials, through increased demand for products made from recycled materials, developing a consistent supply of high-quality materials, and maximizing the capacity of existing manufacturers within the County to utilize secondary materials. tb. Facilitate direct linkages between commercial and industrial generators of secondary materials and local end users. Medium Term: c. Identify and develop new markets for materials that currently have weak or non-existent markets, but which are technically recyclable. d. Encourage the establishment of new end-use industrial facilities within the County. C. Policies for Meeting Goals and Objectives: General policies for achieving the goals and objectives of this Component include the following 1. Target for recycling all materials from the waste stream that are technologically and ' economically feasible to recycle. Technological feasibility is defined as the ability, using technologies currently operating commercially, to collect, process, and ultimately transform a material into a new product that has a market. Economic feasibility is defined as the ability to market a material and recoup sufficient costs such that the total cost of handling the material, or the material when combined with other materials in.a particular recycling program, is less than 50% greater than the direct avoided cost of disposal.' 1 , 2. Develop and implement recycling programs that achieve all of the following:- a. Produce the highest quality materials (in terms of both grades and purity); ' In the 1989 CoSWMP, the direct avoided cost of disposal is calculated at$70.50. Therefore, using this figure, any program that has a cost of less than $105.75 per,ton is deemed to be economically feasible. April 1993 - S-3 Contra Costa County Final braft SRRE ' Recycling Component b. involve all generators of waste in separating and recycling materials; c. serve as means of achieving broader economic and community development goals. ' 3. Foster the involvement of private small businesses and non-profits in owning and operating ' recycling programs. 4. Encourage the establishment in unincorporated communities of local recycling advisory councils, to work with the County to ensure that programs are designed and operated in accord with the needs and desires of the communities they serve. 5. Plan recycling systems that provide positions that are, to the maximum extent possible, skilled, semi-skilled, permanent, and have the possibility of advancement to higher positions. 6. Negotiate Franchise Agreements or Memoranda of Understanding (MOU's) per Ordinance 91- 31 for those unincorporated areas of the County for which franchise agreements or MOU's are not in effect. Negotiations will include: feasibility of regular curbside and multi-family recycling for all areas that have regular refuse collection; the collection of additional material such as OCC and colored HDPE; source-separated collection of materials; feasibility of rural curbside and multi-family collection, or drop-off facility if curbside collection is not feasible; recycling containers in public places. 7. Establish the Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone, in accordance with the proprosal ' approved by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. SECTION II: SUMMARY OF SELECTED PROGRAMS This section summarizes programs selected for implementation in this component (see Section VI for details). Taken together, these programs comprise those actions. The County intends to take in order to improve and expand recycling in the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. The short-term and medium-term planning periods which are referenced refer to January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1994 (short-term) and January 1, 1995 to January 1, 2000 (medium-term). The County will coordinate a comprehensive public information program during the short term ' planning period for all of the selected programs, and where possible will coordinate efforts with jurisdictions using the same franchised hauler. For details, see the Education and Public Information Component. , A. Short-Term Programs 1. Residential Curbside Collection r Continue, evaluate, and expand existing curbside collection programs serving unincorporated areas. Implement changes as needed per franchise agreements or MOU's. Contra Costa County 5- 4 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 2. Multi-Family Collection ' Continue, evaluate, and expand existing .and planned apartment and condominium multi- materials collection programs throughout the unincorporated area. ' 3. New Drop-off Centers Establish new full scale multi-material drop-off facilities in Oakley and Alamo, and unstaffed drop-off sites in strategic locations to serve small communities and rural areas. 4. New Buy-Back Center and Mobile Buy-Back Coordinate West Count JPA the establishment f 1 '- buy-back/drop-off with the y e estabhs me t o amu ti material buy back/drop off facility in El Sobrante. Establish a mobile buy-back system for North Richmond, Rodeo, and Crockett. 5. Expand Commercial and Industrial Collection Routes Encourage and monitor the efforts of franchised haulers to expand collection of recyc1 ables to all commercial and industrial areas. 6. Land Use Permits Building p e Inspection and Codes Establish building codes, building inspection approval, and land use policies to ensure the ease of siting recycling facilities, and to improve the design of living and working space to enable recycling. ' 7. Facilitate Direct Linkages Between Producers and Users of Secondary Materials g Y rIncrease commercial and industrial recycling by facilitating direct linkages between generators, service providers, and end users through a database and hotline system. 8. Source Separation of Construction and Demolition Debris Work with a private hauler to test, on a pilot basis, .the feasibility of source-separating construction/demolition debris. 9. Schools and Other Organizations Facilitate and assist in the establishment of. multi-material school, church, and community center recycling systems. 10. Return-to-Source Plastics -o Dro ff P Establish a Return to Source plastics drop-off'system. April 1993 5- 5 Contra Costa County ty Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component 11. Technical Assistance to Businesses Facilitate commercial and industrial recycling through technical assistance, including waste audits and office paper recycling assistance. See the Source Reduction Component for a description of this program. - 12. Park and Recreation Area Recycling Expand park and recreation recycling to all parks, marinas, and recreation areas. This program is described in the Special Waste Component. 13. Establish Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone In conjunction with the other jurisdictions arrayed along the county's shoreline, establish a Recycling Market Development Zone, as approved by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. B. Medium-Term Programs No new programs are planned for the Medium Term planning period. However, several short term programs will be expanded or considered for continuation. 1. Expansion of Residential and Multi-Family Collection ' Expand residential curbside and apartment/condominium program to, include mixed paper (including high grade ledger) and cardboard. 2. Expansion of Commercial and Industrial Collection Expand commercial collection programs to include other materials, as practical. ' 3. Consideration of Results of C & D Pilot Program , Based on results of pilot study, evaluate the feasibility of expanding the construction/demolition source separation program, including the possibility of making the program mandatory. , In addition, in the medium term, the County will assess the overall performance of recycling programs. If they are found to be deficient, the County will consider the following actions: , 1. Evaluate the need for mandatory source separation of residential and commercial recyclables. 2. Assess whether more intensive education and public information campaigns, further . commingling, or even post-sorting of mixed commercial/industrial wastes, would help achieve higher diversion rates. Plan and implement such programs, as necessary. ; Contra Costa County S- 6 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component , SECTION III. .GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS , ' A. Market Development Without market development, the increasing production of recycled materials will lead to glutted markets and depressed prices for many commodities, and will result in decreased revenues for recycling programs, increased costs to ratepayers, and instability for the integrated waste management system. Most materials will be collected and marketed by the private ' sector, and will be outside of the direct control of the County. However, the County can provide general assistance in strengthening markets for recycled materials in several ways: 1. Establish County product procurement preferences for all targeted materials, either through the . establishment of price preferences or through set-asides, and encourage the cities to adopt similar policies. Purchasing,power can be increased if cities purchase some items through the County or jointly. The County should also require all contractors to use recycled products, based on the same standards developed for the County's own purchases. ' 2. Encourage existing industries in the County to initiate or increase their use of secondary materials as feedstock; encourage commercial establishments to adopt procurement standards similar to the County's, and to "stock, use, and sell recycled"; encourage consumers to "buy recycled." 3. Encourage industries that process and use recycled materials to locate within the county. This ' .may be done through providing assistance with permits and zoning variances, providing minor infrastructure improvements, and actively soliciting targeted industries and companies. The County has a stong interest in establishing a viable "Recycling Market Development Zone", ' as authorized by SB 1322 (statutes of 1989), wherein recycling enterprises would be encouraged to locate, and could be provided with the kinds of services mentioned above. 4. Assist large generators in use of existing waste exchanges, to facilitate direct generator-user linkages.- 5. Assist large collectors and processors of recycled materials (such as curbside program operators) in establishing long-term markets. UPDATE . The.unincorporated portions of the County's shoreline, along with the predominantly industrial shoreline within the incorporated areas served by the Delta Diablo Sanitation District and West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority, and the cities of Pittsburg, Antioch, Brentwood, Martinez, Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, and E1 Cerrito, were designated in June 1992, as a Recycling Market Development Zone (RMDZ) by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. The RMDZ will be a contiguous area, and will be administered by a Shoreline RMDZ Council, comprised of representatives from the member agencies. The Council will direct efforts to encourage new industries to locate within the zone, and will also encourage "piggy- backing" of new recycling processes onto existing industries located within the zone. Four material types will be targeted within the zone: compost, plastics, tin, and rubber. April 1993 5- 7 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component The County recognizes the incentives for recycling market development inherent in locating re-use and re-manufacturing businesses in proximity to the three planned Multi-Functional Solid Waste ' Facilities (MFSWF's). ,The establishment of the MFSWF's will, to some extent, centralize the handling and marketing of secondary materials in the county. The County will endeavor to assist the operators of the MFSWF's to market materials to end user industries within the RMDZ. In this way, the County can help assure a market for the increased volume of secondary materials being produced in the county, and at the same time guarantee the viability of those industries being encouraged to locate or expand operations within the RMDZ. For more information on the establishment of the RMDZ, please refer to Appendix D. B. Recycling as Community Development Recycling has the potential to be far more than a waste management method: it can also be a powerful tool for economic and community development. , Institutionalizing recycling may displace the people for whom recycling is not merely a job, but a livelihood. Flow control and anti-scavenging ordinances are meant to ensure the flow of materials directly into recycling programs, and to avoid circuitous routing of materials through scavengers and dealers. Though these measures may improve the economics of recycling programs, they may be , detrimental to the economics of scavenging and scrap dealing. Therefore, the development of recycling programs must be sensitive to the needs and efforts of those already involved at what may be termed the "low-end" of recycling. New recycling programs should , be designed to fill some of the same social roles as their predecessor programs. This may be accomplished in.several ways: 1. Programs should be designed and implemented that create local jobs, and which include job training for unskilled workers. Workers should have opportunities to advance to positions of , higher responsibility, interest, and pay. The establishment of the RMDZ along the county's shoreline is expected to create jobs, and development of the RMDZ will be coordinated with vocational training programs at local community colleges, and with the Private Industry , Councils (PIC's) of the cities of Richmond and Pittsburg, and that of the County. 2. Recycling programs produce several raw materials. To the greatest extent possible, these , materials should be used locally, both for the sake of developing and strengthening markets for materials, and for creation of a diversity of new positions in all stages of recycling processes. 3. To the greatest extent possible, small businesses and private non-profits should be included in , the development of new programs. Small businesses tend to employ more people per investment dollar, and to create more innovations, relative to large businesses. The private non-profit sector is motivated not by profit, but by a desire to improve the communities in which they operate. Private non-profits have a long history of involvement in recycling, are active in recycling in Contra Costa County, and have the advantage of giving as much back to the community as they take from it. 4. Recycling programs should create, rather than impede, income opportunities for community , groups and low-income residents. For example, rather than instituting an anti-scavenging Contra Costa County S- 8 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component F ordinance, scavenging can-be tolerated, with the loss in revenues for recycling programs made up through a rate surcharge on multi-can residential refuse collection service or on commercial and industrial refuse rates (the County would also save on enforcement and prosecution). Materials would be sold to buy-backs, and would thus be counted toward diversion goals. Another example of creating income opportunities is through the establishment of buy-backs that pay a premium to community groups that collect and sell secondary materials. In some low-income unincorporated communities, it may be cost-effective to replace curbside programs with buy-backs, and to subsidize the price paid to residents for certain materials, such as newsprint and mixed paper;that other buy-backs do not purchase. 5. Finally, recycling activities and centers can serve as community institutions and focal points. Recycling centers and programs can foster civic pride through common involvement in a tangible environmental activity. Drop-off and buy-back centers can:become meeting places for members of the community. . Non-profits can cycle wealth back into the community; by dividing excess revenues among eligible community groups, activities, and non-profit organizations.' iC. Source Separated vs. Commingled Collection: When collection of recycled materials occurs at the source (as opposed to delivery to a central facility by the generator), there are three possible modes of collection: 1. mixed waste collection, in-which recyclables are collected mixed with other, non-recyclable materials, most of which will be landfilled; 2. commingled collection, in which recyclables are separated.from materials intended for disposal, but individual material types are not separated from one another (or a minimal amount of separation occurs, e.g., newspapers are separated from containers); and 3. source separation, in which each material type is prepared and collected separately. ' These three modes of collection each necessitate a different set of ractices on the part of generators to prepare materials, a different set of processes to convert materials into commodities, and different program economics. In general, the more highly separated materials are at the point of generation, the less costly their processing, and the purer and more marketable the final product. Higher levels of source separation are less convenient to generators, and may increase collection costs: Lower degrees of source separation may be simpler for the preparers and collectors of recyclables, but may require complex and sophisticated facilities to separate out the individual commodities from the mixture. As recycling matures as a service industry increasingly mgly dominated by large, well-capitalized firms, the tendency is toward commingling, and away from source separation. Concomitantly, many waste management firms that control, or seek .to control whole regions, are rushing to build materials recovery facilities (MRF's) to serve them. MRF's are industrial facilities in which commodities are extracted from commingled materials and commercial .wastes; and in some cases from mixed ' residential wastes. MRF's are highly variable in their size, design, and function, but they share certain qualities: they are expensive to build and operate, with total capital costs per daily input ton of $10,000-$22,000,,and operating costs, before revenues from sale of materials, and without considering capital costs, of $20-60 per ton (Chertow, 1989); they are nearly all flexible in their design, and able to accommodate changing commingled mixes and different sources-of materials, such as both residential and commercial; and they nearly. all produce higher levels of residue (typically 25%) than processes receiving source separated materials (ibid). Aril 1993 5- 9 Contra Costa County ry Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component In choosing a recycling system, the convenience and flexibility of commingled collection must be weighed against the cost, contamination, and high residue levels of commingled processing. Furthermore, convenience itself may not be entirely desirable. Source separation, in which a generator scrutinizes and categorizes each article they discard, is compatible with a transition to a society that, as a whole, has greater respect for natural resources and that practices conservation on ' a daily basis. Within the context of AB 939 and the new hierarchy of waste management practices, the transition in attitudes and practices should facilitate acceptance of, and participation in source reduction programs. A degree of active involvement of generators is essential to a successful transition to the new attitudes that the new systems will require; commingling poses the twin dangers of contamination and loss of involvement. The county has evolved into three distinct wastesheds, each of which reflects a geographic planning i area and the presence of a historic landfill: East, West and Central. The 1989 County Solid Waste Management Plan (CoSWMP) identified the need for solid waste transfer and processing facilities in each wasteshed. It also identified, depending on growth in the south-central area of the county, t a fourth wasteshed from a division of the Central County area into North and South. Such a division may necessitate the development of a fourth transfer/processing facility located in South Central County. Proposals for multi-functional solid waste facilities (MFSWF) that include transfer, i processing, composting, and household hazardous waste collection, for the central, west, and east wastesheds has been reviewed by the Local Task Force. Each proposed MFSWF -- the West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility, ACME Fill Waste Recovery and Transfer Station, the East County Community Collection Center, and perhaps a fourth in South Central County -- will serve as a center for processing recyclables, composting organic materials, collecting household hazardous wastes, and transferring garbage from wastesheds. Essentially, the jurisdictions in the county are adopting a subregional system of waste management, and the MFSWF's are the center piece of each subregion's system. While the County endorses the development of the MFSWF's, and intends to participate in the planning and administration of these facilities, the County does not intend to utilize the manual or ' mechanical separation of mixed waste that these facilities will be capable of. Instead, the County will work to ensure that the designs of,the facilities are of sufficient flexibility to allow them to accept and process source separated and commingled materials. The franchise agreements the County has entered into in Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg, provide flexibility for programmatic change.for curbside recycling, including segregation of recyclables and expansion of materials collected curbside. These franchise agreements will serve as models for agreements or MOU's that are to be established for all of the unincorporated areas (see following section), to ensure that the secondary materials produced in the unincorporated areas will be of the highest,most marketable quality. Until the MFSWF's are established, materials from the unincorporated areas will continue to be delivered to the existing intermediate processing centers (IPC's). The County will conduct periodic evaluations of this policy to ensure that recycling systems in the unincorporated areas are technically and economically sound. , D. , The County's Role in Program Planning and ILnplementation AB 939 requires the preparation of a single recycling component for the entire unincorporated portion of the County. This task is complicated by several factors: first, there are a large number of unincorporated communities, as well as fairly extensive rural areas. in the County. Several Contra Costa County 5- 10 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component unincorporated communities are of a substantial size (six communities are over 10,000 population), and there is a great degree of variance in demographic, commercial, industrial, and geographic structure of the communities. Second, there are eight sanitary districts that serve as the franchising agencies for nearly all the unincorporated communities. However, the County has adopted a franchising ordinance and is currently in the process of implementing franchises for West Pittsburg, Discovery Bay, and several other communities. Finally, some nine private haulers and recyclers service the unincorporated areas. Many of the existing or planned programs share equipment and routes with adjacent incorporated areas, rendering costing and monitoring of the programs for the unincorporated areas difficult. While the private sector has been responsive recently to the recycling needs of the cities and the County without further implementation of franchise agreements, the County itself has little control over the process of expanding recycling services and opportunities in the unincorporated areas. Furthermore, the number of agencies vying for control of portions of the waste stream can result in redundancy and confusion for the agencies and the.ratepayer. The County is in a position of being responsible for the preparation of the SRRE for the unincorporated areas, and is the body that will be held accountable for the implementation of the plan. It is, therefore, critical that the County adopt policies and take steps to ensure that it has the ability to comply with state mandates, and to ensure cost-effective and responsive administration of programs. For the recycling component, the County shall adopt the following policies: 1. The County shall ensure that all unincorporated areas are served with regular recycling services, including, where appropriate, programs for residences; commercial establishments, industries, schools, institutions, and recreational areas. 2. The County shall ensure cost effective program design and operation. 3. The County shall seek sufficient authority over all types of recycling programs in order to ensure that service is adequate to the needs of residents and businesses; to assess the performance of programs and their progress toward meeting diversion goals; and to maintain a two-way flow of information between service providers and the County, both for the purposes of monitoring program performance, and for communicating the County's needs to the service providers. The County will implement these policies in.two ways. First, the Board of Supervisors may restrict access to landfills for communities not having recycling programs consistent with the Resource Recovery Program for the two new landfills. As noted previously, the Board has declared its intent and is circulating for comment an ordinance to prohibit specific materials from disposal in the two new landfills. The materials to be diverted are: plastics, cardboard, newspaper, white ledger paper, mixed paper, tin, aluminum_, glass, wood waste, yard waste, white goods, metals, and construction/demolition debris. Second the Count expanding is ex andin its own control over the waste stream of the entire unincorporated portion of the County either by enacting franchise agreements directly or through memoranda of understanding with existing franchise agencies. While the County April 1993 5- 11 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component appreciates the efforts of several of the Sanitary Districts to establish diversion programs, the County must take more direct control of, and responsibility over, the establishment of an integrated waste management system in the unincorporated areas. Several recycling franchise zones could be created (not necessarily contiguous with garbage hauling franchises),that would be sufficiently geographically distinct and of sufficient population to provide economies of scale in program design and operation. UPDATE On December 22, 1992 the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 92-105 Material Diversion Ordinance. The Ordinance requires public agencies to meet minimum resource recovery requirements in order to dispose of solid.waste in landfills located in the unincorporated area of the County. Section 418-10.603 Recycling Program states, "Beginning January 1, 1993, an operator of a landfill shall not accept waste from haulers.or a local agency that is not implementing a ' recycling program approved and certified by the board as satifying the requirements of this chapter." SECTION IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. CoSWMP Goals The 1989 CoSWMP (County Solid Waste Management Plan) had as one of its general goals "recycle as much of the solid waste as possible". The CoSWMP set a goal of recycling an additional 15% by 1994, for an overall rate of 31%. Medium term and long term goals were 41% and 71%, but the plan anticipated building waste-to-energy plants to achieve these high goals. In order to achieve these goals, and because of the urgent landfill capacity situation, the, CoSWMP called for all cities and sanitary districts to prepare and submit to the county plans detailing their efforts to increase recycling and other diversion activities. Cities were required to include curbside ' recycling programs in their plans. In addition the CoSWMP detailed several other policies related to recycling, including the following: • The County Solid Waste Commission was to determine by mid-1990 the opportunity and need for additional drop-off and buy-back recycling centers • Cities were encouraged to adopt requirements similar to the County's, which require large ' housing developments to provide sufficient space for on-site drop-off recycling areas and architectural design to encourage and facilitate recycling. • The Plastics Recycling Task Force was to test plastics recycling methods. If plastics recycling goals were not,met, or if programs proved infeasible, then the Board of Supervisors was to impose a ban on the types of plastics not meeting the, recycling goals. • To foster the development of markets for recycled materials, the County was to prepare a report on local governments' role in procurement and market development products containing recycled materials. Contra Costa County 5- 12 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component • The County Resource Recovery Specialist was to work with businesses and industries to modify manufacturing practices and waste disposal practices to encourage more recycling;this program included office paper recycling. • The Plan, supported shredding of discarded tires for energy recovery. • The plan encouraged concrete and asphalt recycling, discouraged disposal of these materials, and requested local- agencies to allow use of these recycled products in their construction specifications. • The plan encouraged the.recycling and market development of other items not then being regularly recycled. • The plan supported consideration of mechanical processes for sorting mixed wastes. Progress toward CoSWMP goals Nearly all the cities have implemented curbside programs, and several have begun commercial and industrial recycling programs. The Board of Supervisors is circulating for comment an ordinance prohibiting the landfilling of PET, HDPE (plastic soda and milk bottles),expanded polystyrene foam, and polyethylene bags. These items are currently, or soon will be, collected by curbside programs. The Board of Supervisors has accepted a Plastics Resins Recyclability Evaluation Index developed by the-Plastics Task Force as a policy-guide for future decisions on plastics. The Board of Supervisors has designated additional materials to be prohibited from landfill.disposal including tin, aluminum, glass, paper, yard waste,white goods, and construction/demolition debris. Many new recycling prorams are currently being planned and implemented in the unincorporated areas and in County facilities. While the County itself is involved directly in several programs, particularly public information, technical assistance, and research and development of plastics recycling programs, most of the new programs, as well as those that have contributed to the existing recycling rate,are private sector programs. In this section private sector programs will be detailed first, and broken down into East, Central, and West County; these descriptions will be followed by details on County-run programs. B. Existing Recycling Programs The waste characterization study quantified the amounts and types of materials diverted through recycling from the commercial, industrial, and residential sectors in 1990. The total- identified amount of materials recycled from residential sources was 7,300 tons per year, equal to a recycling rate for residential wastes of 10.31%. Commercial recycling was quantified at 4750 tons per year, or a recycling rate of 16.07%. Industrial recycling was quantified at 3,150 tons per year, or 5.41% of that segment of the waste stream. The overall figures are: 15,200 tons per year, or 8.16% of the entire waste stream diverted through recycling. April 1993 5- 13 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component r East County Residential: Concord Disposal Service (CDS) is .the current hauler for all of the East County unincorporated areas, with the exception of a portion of West Pittsburg. CDS has implemented a curbside program in Oakley, and is planning curbside service for Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg beginning in April 1991. The CDS curbside program collects newsprint, aluminum, glass, and PET plastics using a two bin system: one for newsprint, the other for commingled containers. Materials are delivered to Mt. Diablo Paper Stock, where they are separated using a manual process, and prepared for market. CDS is considering adding HDPE plastic and tinned cans to the commingled mixture. In addition to the curbside program, CDS also has a number of drop-off locations for newsprint, cardboard, and some other materials. These are simply bins placed in parking lots and other locations, usually at the request of a charitable organization, which receives some revenues from the materials. Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal (PHBD) is the franchised hauler for a portion of West Pittsburg. PHBD is planning to implement a curbside program for West Pittsburg similar to their other curbside programs, which pick-up aluminum, tin cans, glass, HDPE and PET plastics, small pieces of , cardboard, and newspaper. PHBD provides a'one-bin, commingled collection service, with newspaper bundled and thrown into a separate bin on the collection truck. Materials are separated and prepared for market at either PHBD's Pacheco facility or at their Antioch facility. PHBD is in the process of instituting apartment and condominium recycling programs in their service area. PHBD is setting up these programs on a development by development basis, and tailoring the collection system to the layout and other constraints of individual complexes. Two buy-backs are located in East County, Delta Scrap and Salvage, which purchases California Redemption Value beverage containers and scrap metal, and Many Hands, a private non-profit located in the City of Pittsburg. Many Hands accepts materials on a drop-of basis as well. Apparently there are no supermarket redemption centers in East County. r Commercial and Industrial: Delta Scrap and Salvage has accounts with an undetermined number of commercial and industrial establishments to haul and recycle scrap metals. No quantities of materials are available for this operation. However, DSS deals in a wide variety of scrap materials. CDS has many commercial accounts around the county, from which it collects cardboard, computer paper, and white ledger paper. Many Hands, in Pittsburg, collects cardboard from small businesses. PHBD is in the process of instituting collection of commercial and industrial materials, including corrugated cardboard and white ledger paper. PHBD is planning to recruit individual businesses to , participate in the recycling program, and to set up regular routes for "whatever materials (they) can get enough of." Contra Costa County 5- 14� April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component There are several wood and pallet operations in East County, all of.which are thought to chip wood products for incineration. Central County: Residential: Central County unincorporated areas are divided among several haulers: PHBD in the north; Valley Waste Management (VWM) in the South, and Orinda-Moraga Disposal (OMD) in the Canyon area. All three of these haulers are providing curbside and other recycling services within their service area. PHBD has implemented the program described above in Alhambra Valley, Pacheco, and Pleasant Hill Bart, and is operating a pilot program in Mountain View. Furthermore, PHBD has a drop-off area in Clyde, and a full-service buy-back and drop off facility in Pacheco. Valley Waste Management, which serves the communities of Alamo, Blackhawk, Diablo, Saranap, and the unincorporated areas of Walnut Creek, provides curbside service and multi-residential recycling service in all of its service area. These programs collect aluminum, glass, newsprint, tin cans, and PET and HDPE plastics. r OMD provides curbside service in Canyon, collecting glass, aluminum, and newsprint. Supermarket Redemption centers are located in Alamo and in adjacent incorporated areas. P P � J P In addition to PHBD's Pacheco facility, three other drop-off and buy-back centers are located in the unincorporated areas of central county, or are located in incorporated areas but serve unincorporated area residents. The Acme Transfer Station in Pacheco operates a drop-off facility that accepts OCC, OONP,_magazines, aluminum cans, steel cans, HDPE and PET plastic, and glass containers; two buy- backs serve unincorporated Central County: Mt. Diablo Paper Stock and Kelly's Cash for Cans, both in Concord. Commercial and Industrial: All three haulers are in the process of planning or implementing recyclables collection from businesses. Central Sanitary District, the franchising agency for much of Central County, has authorized Valley Waste Management to institute office paper recycling, cardboard recycling, and restaurant and bar glass recycling, and is working with its other service providers to institute commercial recycling programs. OMD is planning to institute a multi-material commercial program, a bar and restaurant glass program, and an office paper program in its service area, though few if any commercial establishments exist in the unincorporated areas OMD services. The PHBD commercial and industrial program was described in the East County section. Others: A rock crusher, County Quarry Products, is located in Martinez, and accepts concrete and asphalt for a fee. April 1993 5- 15 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component i West County Residential: ' Richmond Sanitary Service (RSS) services all of the West County unincorporated areas, with the exceptions of Kensington, Crockett, Rodeo, and Port Costa. RSS is in the process of instituting curbside and multi-dwelling programs in all of its service area. The RSS curbside program collects glass, aluminum, tin cans, newspaper, PET and HDPE plastics. Trailer parks are included in the curbside program. Materials are collected commingled. Apartments and condominiums are provided either individual buckets, toters, or bins, depending on physical layout. RSS also accepts newsprint, cardboard, aluminum and glass on a drop-off basis at the West County Landfill, and is planning to open a full-service buy-back in the summer of 1991 at their temporary processing center at the end of Parr Blvd. Kensington is served by Bay View Refuse (BVR), which has recently instituted a weekly curbside recycling program for residents. BVR provides three buckets to each household, one for glass, one for aluminum and tin, and one for PET plastic. Bundled newspapers are also collected. BVR has no processing facilities. Materials are delivered directly to end users and brokers in Contra Costa, Alameda, and Marin Counties. The El Cerrito recycling center, a drop-off facility that accepts the widest variety of materials of any East Bay recycling facility, is located in the incorporated area, but serves the surrounding communities. Crockett Garbage Co. is planning to begin curbside recycling to compliment the Boy Scout's periodic aluminum and newsprint scrap drives, and the efforts of two elderly gentlemen from Mare Island who scavenge considerable amounts of materials. Crockett Garbage plans to collect newsprint, ' aluminum (both of which will be delivered to the Scouts), glass, tin, and PET and HDPE plastic. Crockett Garbage is exploring the parameters of commingled and source separated collection, and the possibility of mandatory source separation. PHBD, which serves Rodeo, began curbside collection there in February, 1991. Materials are delivered to their Pacheco facility. Port Costa Recycles does a bi-monthly pick-up of newspaper, cardboard, mixed paper, glass, aluminum, tin, and PET plastic, making it the most comprehensive curbside program in the County. There is only one convenience center in the unincorporated west County area, located in Rodeo. No full service buy-backs are located in the unincorporated areas, though RSS plans to open one, and another is located across the county line in the City of Berkeley. Commercial and Industrial: RSS has a restaurant and bar glass collection program, and is currently implementing collection of commercial cardboard and office paper from the commercial districts in El Sobrante, along San Pablo Ave., Appian Way, and Tara Hills Drive. Contra Costa County 5- 16 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component l ♦fit BVR collects cardboard, aluminum, and glassfrom businesses in Kensington's two commercial. areas. County Programs Land Use Conditions of Approval The Land Use Permit Conditions of Approval for the ACME Transfer Station, the Marsh Canyon Landfill, and the Keller Canyon Sanitary Landfill require participation in the County's Resource Recovery Program as well as mandate reductions in solid waste disposal in the two landfills by 25% by the year 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. Airports By Board action in 1989, Air Service Carriers using County operated airports must implement recycling programs for aluminum cans, paper, and plastic containers. Plastics By Board actions in August-1990, June-1991, and October-1991, PET, clear and colored HDPE, expanded polystyrene foam, LDPE (polyethylene grocery and garment) bags must be diverted from disposal in landfills. By Board action in October-1991, a return-to-source network of grocery and drug stores as well as dry cleaners will be used to collect polyethylene grocery and garment bags and divert disposal in the new landfills. o Other Materials Diversion By Board actions in 1990 and 1991, corrugated cardboard, paper, woodwaste, metals, aluminum cans, glass, and construction/demolition debris must be diverted from the new landfills. Schools By Board actions in.March-1990 and October-1991, the County will assist schools, many of which are located in cities, in implementing a multi-materials recycling program. The Schools Recycling Program includes a curriculum and recycling of paper, cardboard, aluminum cans, polystyrene food trays, and milk and juice boxes. CountyGovernment Offices Recycling Offices Recycling -By Board action in June-1991, the County supports implementation of commercial office recycling programs which may use the County's own program as a model for recycling white and mixed paper, aluminum cans, plastic beverage containers, expanded polystyrene foam packaging, and corrugated cardboard. April 1993 5- 17 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Tra— inin2 By Board action in August-1991, the County supports, through its County Government Recycling Program, training of employable General Assistance recipients in all aspects of the recycling field with the goal of preparing the participants for unsubsidized employment in recycling businesses and/or within the solid waste industry. Market Development for Secondary Materials The Environmental Affairs Committee of the Board authorized, in 1991, use of a consultant to develop a Secondary Materials Market Development Plan for the County. This Plan will be utilized in development of the County's application for designation as a Recycling Market Development Zone. Public Awareness By Board actions in 1989 and 1990, the Board sponsors Annual Recycling Awards, distribution of the "Contra Costa County Recycling and Waste Reduction Guide." None of the program operators nor the County are planning to decrease in scope or phase out existing programs. On the contrary, programs are being developed and implemented at a rapid rate. The successful implementation of programs already planned will have a significant positive impact on diversion rates. SECTION V. MATERIALS SELECTION In this section, individual waste types and categories will be evaluated and selected as priority targets for recycling programs. A. Selection Criteria The following are the criteria by which materials will be chosen from each generator segment as priorities for recycling: 1. Weight of the waste type, relative to the waste stream segment and the total waste stream. , 2. Volume of the waste type, relative to the waste stream segment and the total waste stream. 3. Hazard of the waste type. 4. Whether the waste type consists of a non-renewable resource. 5. The marketability of the waste type as a secondary material. 6. Whether the products of current or forecast recycling processes for the waste type are of equal desirability, value, and recyclability as the original products constituting the waste type. Contra Costa County 5- 18 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Weight,volume,hazard, non-renewable resources content, and marketability of materials types are discussed fully in the Source Reduction Component. Here criterion 6 will be discussed in detail. Criterion 6 is intended as a means of determining the potential for "closed loop" recycling. Closed loop recycling occurs when a waste material is recycled into the same or a similar product as the recycled material was constituted from. The recycled products have the same characteristics of quality and marketability as their predecessors, and may be recycled into another product with the same or similar characteristics. In this way, materials can be recycled not just once, but many times, and in some instances (such as aluminum or glass) indefinitely. "Linear recycling" is'the opposite of closed loop recycling, and is the condition that criterion 6 is meant to screen for. Linear recycling occurs when a material is recycled into a product that is not recyclable or marketable, or that is recyclable or marketable as a lower grade material. Examples of linear recycling are mixed paper, which is used in manufacturing asphalt roof shingles and low-grade paper products; and most plastics, which are for the most part recycled into disposable products. The following table divides recyclable materials into those which tend to be recycled in closed loops, and those which tend to be recycled linearly. In targeting materials for recycling, closed loop materials will receive higher priority than linear materials. 1 1 - Contra Costa County April 1993 5 19 Co r o Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Table 5- Closed Loop and Linear Recycling Closed Loop Materials Linear Materials Paper.: Corrugated cardboard Mixed paper Newspaper High grade ledger Plastic: none. HDPE PET Film plastics Polystyrene Expanded polystyrene Glass:Re � , fillable glass containers CA Redemption value glass Other recyclable glass Metals: Aluminum cans Ferrous metals and tin cans* Non-ferrous metals and AL scrap White Goods Organics: Yard waste Wood waste (as mulch or bulking agent) OtherOrganics: Textiles and leather Tires and rubber products Special Wastes: Bulky wastes Mixed metals Other Wastes Inert solids Latex paint Solvents ' *Tin cans and ferrous metals can be closed loop-recycled;however,most of the tin cans from the Bay Area are detinned,then the steel is used as a catalyst in a mineral refining process. B. Materials Selected Based on the application of all six criteria, this section describes the materials selected as priority targets for recycling from the residential, commercial, and industrial waste streams. The following descriptions include end uses, markets and possible market development activities for each material selected. Contra Costa County 5- 20 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Corrugated Cardboard (OCC) is targeted,'for recycling from all three segments of the waste stream. This category also includes brown (kraft) paper bags. OCC makes up 6% of the r residential waste stream, 20.5% of the commercial waste stream, and 26.3% of the industrial waste stream. The current recycling rate for the commercial sector is already quite high, but it is very low for the other two sectors. OCC can be recycled in a closed loop since the fibers from OCC can be used for manufacturing any of the three layers of new corrugated board. Many local paper dealers handle OCC. In addition, the Gaylord paper plant in Antioch uses 60% recycled fiber in the manufacture of new corrugated cardboard. OCC has strong domestic and export markets, with demand expected by many industry analysts to outstrip supply within the next five years.= Markets are probably sufficiently strong to preclude distinct market 'development activities, though the County could specify recycled content in .shipping containers. A collapse of the OCC market would seriously affect the success of the selected programs, particularly commercial and industrial programs. rNewsprint (ONP)Is targeted for the residential and commercial waste streams,where it makes up 10.5% and 6.9% of those waste streams. Current recycling rates are 27% for the residential sector, and 54.5% for the commercial. Newsprint is the most common material targeted for residential programs. Its end uses include new newsprint, as well as several linear uses including asphalt roofing tiles and blown-in attic insulation. There is a strong export market for ONP, but there is a lack of domestic deinking capacity. The recent glutting of the market, caused by new recycling programs coming on line, has contributed to a decline in prices over the past two years. Prices appear to'be stabilizing now. Due to the projected strength in the export market, and new de-inking capacity coming on-line over the next three years, the outlook for ONP is encouraging. AB 1305 (1989) requires all commercial consumers of newsprint to certify to the State that the newsprint they use has a minimum recycled fiber content. The County should monitor local commercial consumers of newsprint to ensure that they are complying, .and assist them in identifying suppliers if they are not. Another market development activity would involve cooperative marketing by the recyclers in,the county to a single mill, and working out a tolling agreement between the mill and a local newspaper. A collapse of the ONP market would have serious consequences for the achievement of the short term and medium term goals. High Grade Paper makes u 1.0% of the residential waste stream 1.0% of the commercial g P P , and 8.8% of the industrial. There are many paper grades within this category, most of which can be recycled in a closed loop. Common end uses include new high grade paper, and the outer laminate for the outer layer of white. corrugated board. High grades have strong domestic and export markets, which are expected to stay strong, due to the intrinsic value of �- the material. Nevertheless, prices have fallen recently. All of the large paper dealers in the region deal in at least several high grades, the most common being white ledger, colored ledger, and computer printout. The Gaylord plant in Antioch is a local end user. Two market development activities should be instituted for this material: a purchase reference P P P for County purchases, and a "buy recycled" public information campaign. Loss of the high grade paper market is unlikely, but would not have a disastrous effect on efforts to meet diversion mandates. April 1993 5- 21 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Mixed Paper, which makes up 11.4% of the residential waste stream and 5.8% of the commercial disposal stream, is targeted for recycling from those two sources. Current recycling rates are very low. Mixed paper�is so-called because it is a mix of paper grades. Mixed paper has several end uses. Mixed, it may be linearly recycled into tissue paper, asphalt roof shingles; and closed-loop recycled into low grade paper products, such as box board. "Supermix", a grade of mixed paper containing a higher content of high grade fibers, is usually exported to East and Southeast Asia, where it is manually sorted into its constituent grades for recycling. Magazines are also within this category, though they are considered a separate paper grade. Demand for magazines is weak, but growing, as manufacturers of �. recycled newsprint find that a percentage of magazines in the furnish improves the final product. Jefferson-Smurfit Corp., which has locations in Oakland and San Jose, is a local processor of mixed paper and magazines. Domtar Corp., in San Leandro, uses mixed paper for manufacturing the liner for its sheetrock. Demand for mixed paper may grow, as demand for OCC outstrips supply and new uses are found for mixed paper to replace kraft fibers. However, contamination levels must be kept to a minimum in order to ensure that this material remains a commodity. A viable market development activity is setting purchase preferences for products derived from mixed paper. A second is a strong public education campaign aimed at reducing contamination levels and thus making the product more marketable. Although mixed paper makes up a substantial portion of the total waste stream, an inability to market this material would not devastate efforts to comply with diversion mandates, as projected capture rates are moderate to low. HDPE plastic is used in milk and water jugs, as well as a broad array of containers. It accounts for 1.7% of the residential waste stream and .8% of the commercial stream. The current residential recycling rate is 0.3%. HDPE can be recycled into non-food containers and other products, such as recycling bins and garbage cans. Several of the large paper dealers in the region purchase HDPE, though processing occurs in the midwest and on the east coast. Some HDPE is also exported to China and other Pacific Rim countries. The market outlook for HDPE is favorable, as manufacturers of plastic containers and of products sold in them strive to improve the environmental image of plastic. Market development may be assisted through purchase preferences. A collapse of the market for this material, as for any of the targeted plastics, would have only a minor effect on diversion rates. PET plastic, which accounts for .6% of the residential waste stream, is most commonly found as plastic soda bottles, but increasingly in other containers as well. End uses include carpet fibers and insulation for clothing. PET soda bottles are CRV containers. No end users are located on the west coast, so PET produced here is either exported to the Pacific Rim, or shipped to the east coast. No market development activities are recommended for this material. LDPE plastic is most commonly found as plastic film, including plastic bags, sandwich wrap, and pallet wrap. LDPE makes up 3.3% of the residential waste stream and 2.3% of the commercial waste stream. Because of high contamination levels, the difficulty in identifying ' Contra Costa County 5- 22 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component it, and the lack of end uses, there is currently no market for mixed post-consumer LDPE. However, some sources of LDPE that are more easily identifiable and lower in contaminants r may find a market. For example, plastic grocery bags are accepted back by most supermarket chains, and purportedly recycled into new plastic grocery bags; and large commercial and industrial producers of relatively pure LDPE film, such as is derived from pallet wrap, may be able to find a user for their material. Market development activities include establishing labeling requirements for film plastics. This should be done at the state or federal level. Low capture rates can be expected for this material; the lack of markets for LDPE would have only a minor effect on achievement of diversion goals. Polystyrene �S) and Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) Plastics consist of the same polymer. PS makes up .4% of the residential waste stream, and is most commonly found as cottage cheese and yogurt containers, as well as other brittle plastic containers; EPS, commonly referred to as styrofoam (though this is a trade name), makes up .5% of the residential waste stream and .4% of the commercial waste stream. No recycling of these materials. was detected. PS and EPS may be linearly recycled into such items as casings for electronic devices. There has been a great deal of plastics industry support for recycling EPS, primarily to counteract local product bans. One result of industry efforts.has been the establishment of a local EPS recycler, Bay Polymer in Fremont. Market demand for recycled EPS is currently sufficient, but the economics of transporting the material, and the logistics of cleaning and storing it, render it a difficult material to recycle. Since PS is in its common usages easily washable and stackable, it may be a sound candidate for recycling. No market development activities are recommended for these materials. If the market for post- consumer PS and EPS collapses, they should be diverted through a source reduction measure, such as product bans. California Redemption Value glass and Other Recyclable glass consist of a variety of glass containers. Glass is targeted for recycling from the residential sector, where it makes up 6.1% of the waste stream, and from the commercial sector, where it makes up 4.9% of the waste stream. Current recycling rates are relatively high: 36% for residential CRV glass and 28.3% for residential other; and 31.0% for commercial CRV, and 13.0% for commercial other. Most certified redemption centers and practically all recycling programs take both CRV glass and other glass. The primary end use for color sorted glass is new glass containers. Mixed color glass, which fetches a much lower price than color sorted, is increasingly used for glasphalt and other linear uses. There are beneficiation (grinding) facilities in Oakland and Newark, and a furnace in Tracy. The recent glut of the glass market was caused by a number of factors, some having to do with supply, others with demand, and still others with politics. Recent legislation (AB 2622) should ease the situation, by requiring a specified percentage of post-consumer cullet in all beverage containers sold in the state. The County should monitor and support legislation aimed at strengthening the market for glass. If the glass market deteriorates it could have serious consequences for achieving diversion rates, and other program aspects will have to be strengthened to make up for any losses.. Aril 1993 5- 23 Contra Costa County tY Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Aluminum cans make up 2.1% of the residential waste stream and 0.5% of the commercial waste stream. Though aluminum cans are not large portions of these waste streams, the ease of identifying, transporting, and marketing them, and their consistent high value make them prime targets for recycling. Aluminum cans are currently collected in all curbside programs, at convenience redemption centers, and at buy-back and drop-off facilities. Major aluminum can manufacturers are located in the Bay Area and provide a ready, practically inexhaustible market, as aluminum cans can be closed-loop recycled into new beverage containers. Recycling aluminum saves vast quantities of energy and avoids the environmental destruction that results from strip-mining bauxite. J Since markets for aluminum cans are very strong, no market development activities are recommended for this material. Tin/Fe (tin cans and ferrous scrap) make up 2.9% of the residential waste stream. Several curbside programs and drop-off centers accept tin cans and ferrous scrap, and most scrap metal dealers purchase ferrous. Tin cans can be closed-loop recycled, through detinning and recycling of the steel portion of the can into new products. The local market for tin involves linear recycling, as the cans are shredded and used as a catalyst in extracting copper from ore. Ferrous scrap has a domestic market, but much of that produced on the west coast is exported to the Pacific Rim. Detinning and scrap steel recycling are identified as target processes for the Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone. Non-Ferrous Scrap/Aluminum scrap makes up .1% of the residential waste stream and .8% of the commercial waste stream. Most scrap metal grades can be closed-loop recycled, and most have relatively high scrap values. Much recycling of non-ferrous scrap is accomplished through scrap metal dealers. Non-ferrous scrap can be collected in curbside programs, though this is not common. It is more common to accept these materials in buy-back and drop-off programs. Because of the existing network of scrap metal dealers and processors, no specific market development activities are required for these materials. White Goods (enameled appliances, such as washing machines and refrigerators) are disposed at the County's landfills and transfer'stations in small quantities. 2,350 tons of white goods were identified as recycled in the WGS. Current recycling efforts, including pick-up by charitable organizations, drop-off at transfer stations and landfills, and processing by scrap metal dealers, are important components of the recycling system for these materials. VI. RECYCLING PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES This section outlines the recycling program options available to the County for possible implementation in the unincorporated areas. At this point, program options are only described in brief terms, then evaluated according to the requirements of the regulations. Those programs that are selected will be described in detail in the next section. Contra Costa County 5- 24 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component _ i A. Program Alternatives tThis section describes in brief sixteen recycling program options. The options are evaluated below. 1. Residential curbside: Residential curbside programs involve periodic pick-up of a variety of recyclables, typically newsprint, glass, aluminum, tin cans, and some plastics. Curbside programs have the potential for high involvement and substantial diversion from the residential waste stream. Materials may be picked-up either commingled or with various degrees of separation. 2. Multi-family: Apartment and condominium recycling often requires separate or modified collection equipment. The same materials as curbside are typically targeted. Type and placement of collection containers may need to be worked out with managers of each development. �., 3. Drop-off: Drop-off recycling centers are facilities that receive source separated materials from the public on a donation basis. Targeted materials may include a wider range than is typical for curbside and buy-back programs: several paper grades, color separated glass, aluminum, scrap metal, and several plastics grades may be accepted. 4. Buy-back: Buy-backs purchase materials from the public at what may be considered market value. Buy- backs are a popular alternative or compliment to curbside programs in low and moderate income areas. Buy-backs may be combined with drop-off facilities for low-value materials. 5. Mobile buy-back: tMobile buy-backs are modified recycling trucks with established schedules or routes for serving a number of neighborhoods or communities. Typically, glass and aluminum are purchased, with the possible additions of cardboard, newsprint, and plastic. 6. Commercial routes: 'f Where commercial development is of sufficient density, it is possible to establish distinct collection routes for commercial materials. Some curbside collection equipment is suitable for commercial pick-up, though large establishments may require special equipment. Some i commercial collection programs run separate routes for cardboard, glass, and other materials, while others have single, multi-material routes. 7. Land Use/Building Codes: The County has the ability through control and regulation of land use to remove a significant institutional barrier to recycling -- the lack of adequate space and proper design of buildings April 1993 5- 25 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component to accommodate the storage and handling of recyclables. Through land use permitting, the County can require adequate space and design for recycling in new and remodeled construction. r 8. . Manual Material recovery operations: Manual Material recovery operation enable the extraction of recyclables from mixed waste streams. Manual facilities use hand labor to separate or extract constituent recyclable materials. 9. Mechanized Material recovery operations: Similar to manual operations, but using higher levels of technology, and replacing some hand labor with automated separation systems. 10. Direct Linkages: Direct linkages between commercial and industrial producers of recyclable materials, and consumers of those materials, can be an efficient means of diverting commercial and industrial wastes. 11. Schools, institutions, and churches: Schools, institutions, and churches provide opportunities for extending recycling into more aspects of more people's lives. Programs typically provide large bins and periodic or on-call collection. Program operators often pay for materials. 12. Parks and recreation areas: This topic is discussed in the Special Wastes Component. 13. Return to Source Plastics drop-off: Specialized drop-off facilities forpost-consumer plastics may be the most appropriate means for handling these difficult materials. 14. Source Separation of construction/demolition debris: Construction and demolition debris can be source separated into major recyclable constituents, such as wood waste and inert solids. Divided or separate bodes can be provided to keep materials.separate until collection, then delivered to recovery facilities. 15. Establishment of a Recycling Market Development Zone:. The County could work with other jurisdictions to apply for a Recycling Market Development Zone, as allowed by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. For a program description refer to Appendix D Contra Costa County 5- 26 April 1993 ' Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component B. Program Evaluation Criteria and Definitions This section defines the twelve criteria used for evaluating each program option. In addition to the criteria required in the regulations, the County finds two more of particular relevance to the Recycling Component: the involvement of generators in the program; and whether a program produces materials that can be recycled in a closed loop. The twelve criteria will be applied to each program option below, in a simple ranking of high, medium, or low rating for each criterion. The evaluations are used for the purpose of comparative program options in a general sense; program selection is based on the evaluations, on the analysis of the waste generation study, and on the basis of the mutual compatibility of programs. 1. Effectiveness in reducing volume or weight of material: High: Program would divert: Above 3% of waste stream Medium: 1-3% of waste stream Low: Below 1% of waste stream ��. 2. Creation of public health or environmental hazard: Will implementation of the program option involve the use of facilities or processes that pose a hazard to the environment or to the public health? High: The option poses no known hazard Medium: Mitigable or mild hazard Low: Severe or unmitigable hazard 3. Ability to accommodate social, economic, or technical change: High: Program is flexible, able to accommodate change Medium: Program may be hampered by predictable, moderate changes Low: Program tied to particular technology, market, or social institution, or would be rendered infeasible by moderate, predictable changes: 4. Shifting of waste types: High: Program option would result in no shift in waste type Medium: Shift, but to more desirable materials Low: Shift to equally or more undesirable material: 5. Time: High: Can be implemented in time to count toward short term goal (by 1994) Medium: Can be implemented in time to meet med. term goals (by 1999) Low: Implementation uncertain or dependent on major change beyond control of local government April 1993 5- 27 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 6. Need to expand or build facilities: High: Little or no expansion or new building required Medium: Moderate expansion or building Low: Major expansion or new building 7. Consistency with local plans, policies, ordinances: High: No inconsistencies r Medium: Minor, easily reconcilable inconsistencies Low: Severe inconsistencies 8. :Institutional barrier s Institutional barriers must be expected in planning and implementing a new integrated waste management system. Institution building should be a major focus of the plan. High: Few or easily overcome institutional barriers Medium: Moderate barriers or moderately difficult to overcome Low: Severe institutional barriers 9. Cost of implementation: For the purposes of this criterion, costs should be expressed as the net cost per ton diverted, based on an evaluation of capital, operating, and administrative costs, and revenue projections. High: Less than $75 per ton Medium: $75-105 per ton Low: More than $105 per ton 10. End-uses and Markets: Do materials recovered by the program option have consistent markets? This criterion includes a consideration of the relative purity of the products resulting from the program option. High: Market is relatively consistent over time for most materials Medium: Market exists, but is weak, highly fluctuating, or limited in size for most targeted materials Low: Markets are weak or non-existent 11. Involvement of waste generators: Involvement of people, as waste generators, in managing and reducing their own wastes is a cornerstone of a successful integrated waste management program. A shift in the solid waste management system requires a corresponding shift in habits, attitudes, and individual actions that affect the production of waste materials. Therefore, the degree to which a program involves generators of waste in separating and preparing materials for recycling (front end methods) is an important consideration. i Contra Costa County 5- 28 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component High: The program strongly encourages involvement of waste generators Medium: Involvement only somewhat encouraged Low: Little or no involvement 12. Closed Loop Recycling: Programs that target materials that can be recycled in a closed loop should be considered preferable to programs that target primarily materials that are recycled linearly. High: Program targets primarily closed loop recyclables Medium: Program targets mixture Low: Program targets primarily linear recyclables C. Comparative Evaluations of Program Alternatives In the following tables, each program option is evaluated according to the twelve criteria. Each criterion is defined such that "high" is always a positive evaluation. For example, a "high" evaluation of hazards creation indicates that the program option has few or no hazards. I April 1993 5- 29 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE �' Recycling Component U to to On to to Cn Cd to to w F o p OA 0A 00 b .O 7_ 7 7 U co O N '� 3 moo ° ao 'poo moo pco moo ' ° poo _u 8 •w � .° x � x x x x x � � x � N Vf L�i En x x x x x x Q y C.' O Cd O N C —Cd U n o, c 0 oo °: a� U > `� 'E o y o a ° o o A x ¢ CZ w U .� U w .° U to r-: OO ON Contra Costa County 5- 30 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component U N N ..G F o a� .. bA 0 cc T7 oA o_A bn to bn c_n o0 on 4 A o� U > 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Cn z 00 R- 3 ' 'ocn Q Q to to a!), a x z z x x z x z � Q .c .n .c 0_A 0j) bA t)JQ d � tyi Cn x � ,c, ►�. .�. xi �. � r�i .�". xi xi Q U c •o 0 o to e� C� C CIS E! 2 z 3 r 0 �. L3cd v N o 0 3 c o In ; o E ° T_ _ E U > n ° o o A x Q ,v F� w U ° U w ° U C!j N M Vy �O l� CO Q\, — N . April 1993 p S-31 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component � . . g � k • U . t © ' k � . � . o �2 k0 cis 2 » 2 7 § § § § §ta 00 Q � Q e � > 0 8 ƒ \ I I # » � / / \ 2 § % 2 a \ R : 2 ® ® » » ® ® ® e . . \ k. 0 k � � \ \ a 7 \ to 04 to00 •/ to00 •/ \ $ $ / . 2 0 � � t / \ to § \ ƒ a & K . k b / \ o / an d 2 Q > ■ U � § 3 _ > 3 . / oco k d p 2 U k \ 3 2 O \ . A M Q4 2 2 R 06 � 2 2 2 . � Contra Costa C»@ 5- 3 - April 1993 Final Da S R£ Recycling Component D. Program,Selection Based on the evaluation of program alternatives, on the results and the analysis of the waste characterization study, and on general perceptions of the most workable and advantageous means of achieving a viable recycling infrastructure within the unincorporated areas, the following recycling programs have been selected for the short term and medium term planning periods. The entire recycling program is first outlined, then individual programs are described in more detail. Programs specific to East County: Short term 1. Continue to implement curbside and multi-family multi-materials programs,until all residences served with regular garbage pick-up, including mobile home parks, have curbside service as well. 2. Establish a new, full-scale multi-material drop-off facility in Oakley, and unstaffed drop-off sites in Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, Byron, and in strategic locations to serve rural areas. 3. : Encourage commercial/industrial recycling route in Oakley as feasible. Medium term 1. Expand residential curbside and apartment/condominium program to include mixed paper (including high grade,ledger) and cardboard. 2. Expand commercial collection programs to include other materials, as practical. 3. Evaluate the need for mandatory source separation of residential and commercial recyclables. 4. Assess whether more intensive education and ublic information campaigns, further P commingling, or even post-sorting of mixed commercial/industrial wastes, would help achieve, higher diversion rates. Plan, and implement such programs, as necessary. Central County: Short term 1. Continue to implement residential curbside programs, until all residences served with regular garbage pick-up, including mobile,home parks, have curbside service as well. 2. Establish a full-scale multi-material drop-off facility in.Alamo, and unstaffed sites in strategic _ rural locations. 3. Encourage commercial/industrial recycling routes in Pleasant Hill Bart, Airport Center Executive Park, Tassajara, Diablo, Alamo, Pacheco, and West Pittsburg. April 1993, 5- 33 Contra Costa County Final Draft.SRRE Recycling Component Medium term 1. Expand residential curbside programs to include cardboard, mixed paper, and high grade' paper. 2. Evaluate the need for mandatory source separation of residential and commercial recyclables. 3. Assess whether greater education efforts, further commingling, or even post-sorting of mixed commercial/industrial wastes, would help achieve higher diversion. West County: Short term 1. Continue to implement residential curbside and multi-family multi-materials programs, until , . all residences served with regular garbage pick-up, including trailer parks, have curbside service as well. 2. Establish new multi-material buy-back/drop-off facility in El Sobrante. 3. Establish unstaffed drop-off centers in strategic locations. 4. Establish mobile buy-back system for North Richmond, Rodeo, and Crockett. S. Encourage commercial/industrial recycling routes in Kensington,El Sobrante,Rodeo,Crockett, and North Richmond, as feasible. Medium term 1. Expand residential curbside programs to include cardboard, mixed paper, and high grade paper. 2. Evaluate the need for mandatory source separation of residential and commercial recyclables. 3. Assess whether more intensive education, further commingling, or even post-sorting of mixed commercial/industrial wastes, would help achieve higher diversion rates. For Entire Unincorporated County: Short Term 1. Facilitate commercial and industrial recycling through technical assistance (waste audits, office paper recycling assistance). 2. Increase commercial and industrial recycling by facilitating direct linkages between generators, 1 service providers, and end users through a database and hotline system. 3. Establish Return to Source plastics drop-off system. Contra Costa County 5- 34 April 1993 Final-Draft SRRE Recycling Component 4. Establish building and inspection codes and land use policies to ensure the ease of siting recycling facilities, and to improve the design of living and working space to enable recycling. 5. Facilitate and assist in the establishment of multi-material school, church, and community center recycling systems. 6. Expand ark and recreation recycling to all arks, marinas, and recreation areas. P Y P 7. Establish construction/demolition material recycling. 8. Establish the Shoreline Recycling Market'Development Zone. Medium term No medium term programs are selected for implementation throughout the unincorporated area in the medium term. E. Projected Diversion From Selected Programs The tables (tables 5-6 through 5-11)presented below depict the short term and medium term expected capture rates for each selected program, as well as the recycling rate from the waste stream segment and the total waste stream that the programs will achieve. �- April 1993 5- 35 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component p < '+ Q\ r N th 10 to to �O O O O �p o0 00 �t t` O M O n O� O N �O M - O O O N 00 M M to O N O O\ N > e!' O tri O O O O O O O O O N O N O O O -+ O O" Ea A W, bR tP, e, 8Q W, bR Do M O to O O d' N M O O O 00 \'D N t- O to •- r+ O M O v� c- M M O O O r� 09 C� O� N O ZO O -+ Ey y a O\ .i 0o O O O O 0 0 0 0 d - N "Vt C N O o � N t- O to tt M 00 O O O O 00 C 10 O0 O O d' 00 to .. l� t- to T — A o � 04 O y w •� N b� LPI ZPI tR ZR W ZR t aa O O M M to to r r N 00 ot` 3 it a Y b to M N M to to �t O N M rK kn [� V % G x N M ctnn O O O O W N y Y t'a U s. b0 - }�r � O \O 00 t- O O O p O \.D � O O O r+ O O\ O00 O -� O O O O O O O O� 00 O O\ M O O to O 00 O N O O O 0 O O O O O � O ri N O O O N O t.: 6l b1 bl eel R e, a M O OO O O\ O O O O O\ M0 O p O yyc Ri N O O. Cl! tC O O O O 0o N O O O O 3 O N M N It O O O O CJ c to . Wm a (� O\ 4 t- O�-� �-+ \0 •-+ o c O� O� to O �r t- t` kn M N �t �t O M \0 l� �-. 0o O �O "t D\ y 3 W N Vj O .r .ter •-+ O M O O d �D (V M fV N O ('i u a V} J' y u o •� � � a w a a a w '0 U z to x ° 0 3 3 a Cd b �+ E° Contra Costa County S- 36 April� prt 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component O �O 00 O O O O 'r O\ C\ 00 M O •-� q o 00 M 00 O N O M C� N 4 O M ' O C O O O O N ..i N 0 6 6 O \D o o to t- kn O M kn kn O O .\D r- M O 4 O . C \�O C4 -+ O O O O O Vy N M bR tR M rn oo 00 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 inM o o �O - O N o •� d va a �+ .. a, 0 tR bR bR b�z SR ' 4w kn 00 to vi 00 00 N N C\ 0 0 � a U d U d i� 00 kn N M � = 3 H V y m O O O O O O o O O O a CJ 1 b\ 8� 9� b� b� b� 8° b� H� 8� 8� CO A d- O t0 00 .- r- O O O O O �,O �t O O O — O M O 00 O O O O O O O O C\ 00 O C\ M O O t0 O 00 N O O O O O O O O O - O -+ N O O O N O l� a a e.40. M 0 0 0 O C\ O O O O d C� M O O O O N O O V M \O O O O O 00 N O O O O U U O N O O N O O O O M 00 O O C> O .. d E t�R ZR tpl V tR 8R bR W. 8l V� 8R bR b° b\ V;11 W vz b° W 6' bR 8z O M .- In .r �O N r- O C\ l- C\ C\ l- m — \,O N d V O M IO 11 -+ 00 O IIO et Q\ a0i �:;rn 00 %n O r+ .r \0 ^- O M O O O \G Nen l� N N O N in �t y F7 �•Me a, A �• A W e �n z C i � U y O C April 1993 5- 37 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component n p �•` -+ M t- N M M O �,O cn N t- M kn N O\ O O O Id: N N O O O O N IIR IIR M N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O It � H > a o q bR M �O ON 00 O Do M N 00 N v V) - V. O N N O C v` O O: t- t- %n c7 O N O M to v It N N M kn O t- S N O 00 tn t o 0 0 tn i n v v ., .� <. U CI �+ r p; d O at to tM U G � O ry U V a o 0 0 0 0 0 •-� r. w 0o U1.0 tn H L O i ^+ 00 \O \.O O O O O O N t` O O p O O 00 M O O O O O O �O M O O M a\ M 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 O M06 •� U ai"i A4 UC �O It O O O O O O\ O O C\ O O p4 t- Cl) \O O O O O O C\ O O O\ O kn � 4 V '1 O O O O M r4 O O M M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C � O, O N vt �t 00 �O 00 O W) \O N N O N N M t� X. yv�, N .�+ M h O 00 4 X 4O+ ..r X M 00 M Zn 4 v O> M C-4 \O -� vicn O CV O 14 N N ++ O O [� O C; a tj< N a a .0 A A w ¢ 0 -Cz Contra Costa County 5- 38 Aprit 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Yz O 000 en O O N N N kn r 0 .Mr � � •� � ?: et N O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... � A 00 d `ct �,O 00 00 r N in r O% -• 00 0 "O O� M i;:% 09 00 0\ 00 0% O O M "O O r 00 00 r M M — M N cUc-q O O O M O O O to r tr; N -r 00 of kn 0 O kn \0 00 0 0 It O 00 00 00 ON M kn M 00 %�O \O �O to r O. w H � en Q: N O, 1� a o A � w bR tR tR L bR bp, URV� U O O M O V7 O O O O N N N .r ON kn LG Q U ai en enOtt N O O OV H 4) w bR bA -+ 00 �O �O o O O O O N r v O O O O O 00 M IO M O O o M O In 14O m O\ ri O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O M 00 o rn o 0 rn 0 0 U .a r. M S O o 0 o O rn o 0 o r- � kIn 0 0 0 0 i`i o r +�.. O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b� H� 8� b� 9, bR 8R bR bR bR 8. 6. UR U. 8. 8. yr oo rY O In N N O N N M t-- c') M to CN O 00 r N "t O\ --+- r. M In 00 �O M %n "t N M N b -" 1n M o N O 4 N (ll O O r O O� •-+ r tito a a� r x .� w 0 3 U z x .� -- 3 U to . ca Cd U O N Z Cd N C p . April 1993 5- 39, Contra Costa County Uty Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component c : n rn o rn o o �r .o kn 00 M 0o N 1-:o0 t� �.: kn M -� N O oo O 00 vi N 1.0 H A � A _• -, 00 rn "t 0400 O O� �O M N O M C h C N O N N to O M M a> U ' C d �O Do F. E.. . C� Bo �' 80 80 00 O 00 0� N N IT O l� N :�. 00 6 M N f3. C� U oo o a o a 0 0 ° p; o o U �. •cam ai O O O O . . �-+ N N 7 ti. Okn 0 M ^" N d. a a. L a, kn A U A C) MrA O w U U L `. t— to N N M kn s. N N M �n 00 00 O "h kA bA C 00 00 O •T U P4 ca U Gy V� T 7 h b � Oc� fYi N N d0 N M O er G CY. N N ch O M O M `O ice. O O U; L. Ux Q O� CON, t` l� t.- M 00 N o0 V y w .-. O N 00 � . o0 tO- 00 10 M N M �OD et t� R a, W . 3 O w N O y ed OrD 0. y Fi U 0n b y U yCL 3 b 'U3 F ' Contra Costa County 5- 40 Aril Final Draft SRRE p 1 993 Recycling Component• VII. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION Residential Programs: Selected Program 1: Residential Curbside Collection } Background Curbside collection of recyclables from single family homes is the most effective and highly visible type of recycling program in the residential sector. The most common items included in curbside collection programs are newspaper, and glass and metal food and beverage containers. These items make up over 18% of the'residential waste stream in the unincorporated areas. Other possible materials for curbside programs are corrugated cardboard, mixed paper; high grade paper, and plastic milk, water, and soda containers. With the addition of these materials, it would be possible to target over 41% of the residential waste stream. Since over half of the unincorporated County's waste stream is from residential sources, curbside and other residential recycling programs have the ability to divert significant portions of the waste stream overall. There are literally hundreds of combinations of specific parameters that can be considered when planning for.curbside collection. Planners need to consider which materials to collect, how to collect them, how, to determine all associated costs and expected revenues, and how to maximize participation rates. Specific decisions that will be made during the program specification stage are detailed below. 1. Design Considerations: a. Assess market for recyclables. This process is important because of the need to verify r' that a market exists or will exist for each material that will be collected. It is also important to ascertain current and projected market price for each recyclable so that revenue data can be included to offset the total cost of the recycling program. b. Materials to be collected -- It is important to consider the particular costs, revenues, and labor productivities associated with each recyclable material, because they vary by material. Density and scrap value are the greatest variables in this consideration. For example, aluminum cans are relatively light, but volumes are low and value is high. Newsprint is relatively dense but volumes are high and value is low. c. Single container (commingled) versus separate container --- This single decision can affect several phases of a program. The vehicle design for collecting source separated materials is different from that used for collecting commingled recyclable, e.g., multiple compartments versus one or two compartments. Also, commingled recyclables will need to be separated, either at curbside by the collection crew, or at an intermediate processing center or MRF. In general, source separation systems require lower capital costs, . produce higher quality materials, and require greater generator involvement, while commingled systems have greater flexibility in the type of materials collected and greater collection efficiencies. A April 1993 5- 41 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE. Recycling Component d. Household preparation required -- Decisions made in this area affect participation rates and resale value of the recyclables, in opposite ways. For example, when programs request households to rinse bottles and cans, or remove metal caps, there is a positive effect on quality, and, therefore, on market price. At the same time, though, residents may perceive that the extra participation is inconvenient and may not recycle their glass. This result would defeat the purpose of the program, so it is important to consider the trade-offs that exist with these decisions. e. Collection frequency -- There are several points to consider with regard to frequency. First, to what degree would pick-up frequency affect the total tonnage of recyclables collected? Weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly collection frequencies are all practiced options. Weekly collection (on the same day as garbage) is best in terms of volume generation. Second, a program that operates less frequent collection should consider providing larger storage containers to households than those required for weekly collection. In general, weekly collection is the first choice. f. Days(s) of collection -- Participation rates may vary with the day(s) that recyclables are collected. Programs should schedule collection on the same day as regular refuse. g. Hours of collection and daily routing -- Hours and routing should be planned to avoid , traffic congestion as much as possible. This will allow for greater crew productivity in a given amount of time. h. Type and size of container -- Providing each household with a suitable container for their recyclables has a significant positive effect on participation rate. It serves as a visual reminder to separate recyclables, and encourages participation by way of neighborhood peer pressure. L Revenue from recyclables -- Determine whether to collect revenues from recyclables or utilize revenues to offset.collection costs. Some jurisdictions choose to retain ownership of the materials collected and to pay a private hauler for the household collection process only. While this may result in a higher collection fee, revenues will be realized from the eventual sale of the recyclables: Additional costs may be incurred, however, that relate to the processing and marketing of the materials. Curbside pilferage of materials, especially aluminum, can endanger programs that rely on revenues from the sale of recyclables. j. Mandatory vs. voluntary participation. While most curbside programs in California are voluntary, mandatory separation of recyclables should not be ruled out. Requiring separation may increase participation rates, or give the County more recourse, through enforcement mechanisms, in the event participation rates are unacceptably low. Mandating source separation may be difficult to implement, but once in place it will help ensure the effectiveness of the program. k. Equipment selection. Recycling vehicles available include trailers, open-top vehicles, side-loaders, and miscellaneous vehicles such as school buses or pick-up trucks. The price for a recycling vehicle can range from $25,000 to $90,000. A detailed economic analysis is required to compare vehicles, considering that a more expensive truck may be Contra Costa County 5- 42 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component most economical when operation costs are evaluated. Collection of materials beyond the basic newspaper, glass, and metal containers will require modified, larger vehicles. Vehicles need to be chosen for compatibility with the container types used for set-out at the curb and for collection at rural drop-off sites, as well as equipment and containers used at the processing center. Experience in some communities indicates that worker injuries are more frequent in systems that use a trailer and require workers to lift heavy loads. 2. Program Description Residential curbside recycling is the single most important recycling program for the unincorporated areas. Curbside recycling is already either planned or implemented in most of the unincorporated areas. However, due to its present lack of franchising authority, the County has little control over the development of these programs. Once direct franchising or indirect accountability of other franchising agencies is established, the County will be in a better position to direct.and monitor this and other programs. The County shall ensure that all residents who have access to regular refuse collection service also have access to regular curbside recycling service. In the rural areas of East County, the viability of bi-weekly or monthly collection will be explored. Otherwise, all.programs should collect weekly, on the same day as refuse collection. The establishment of a drop-off facility may be considered to serve areas for which curbside collection is not feasible. �f In the short term, the current programs provided or planned by the waste haulers will continue. After an evaluation of existing curbside programs, based on design criteria and participation rates, any necessary changes needed to meet mandated diversion will be implemented. The addition of OCC and colored HDPE will be added to programs not currently collecting these materials. In the medium term, however, two crucial issues must be decided: whether to change the separation of recyclables (curbside collection) from voluntary to mandatory; and whether to add mixed paper and high grade paper to materials collected at curbside. In addition, facilities and processing capacity along with collection vehicles will be assessed to determine the optimum level of source separation and the most.appropriate collection vehicles. r April 1993 5- 43 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates All projections are for materials from the residential waste stream. Material Short Medium Term Term Paper Cardboard 2 50 Newspaper 40 50 High Grade paper -- 50 Mixed paper -- 50 Plastic HDPE plastic 35 50 • `PET Plastic 35 50 Glass CRV Glass 30 40 Other Glass 40 50 Metal Aluminum 30 50 Tin cans 30 50 4. Methods for handling and disposal: No special handling facilities or processes will be required for any residues from this.program. 5. End-uses: See Section V. 6. Necessary facilities: Current processing capacity is sufficient for the short-term. As new programs come on line all over the county, however, new facilities may be required. If and when materials recovery facilities are built within the county, a determination will be made to direct delivery of curbside materials to a material recovery facility, or to continue with existing IPC's. 7. Costs: Capital and operating costs will be paid by the contractors operating the program, and r recovered through user fees. Different areas may experience different rates. In current dollars, programs can be expected to cost between $1.25 and $2.25 per household per month, depending on population density, frequency of pick-up, and market conditions. In the medium Contra Costa County 5- 44 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component �� ,i term, with increased quantities and types of materials collected; costs can be expected to rise 30-50% in real terms. ' Costs for coordinating program development will include staff time of approximately .2 FTE, with a one-time expense for extra staff or consultant time at the end-of the short term period to design and oversee implementation of the expanded medium term program. Cost Summary: , Start-up: none Annual:..2 FTE: $9,,600 1994 one-time cost for consultant services cost: $10,000. 8. Monitoring: Contractors will be required to file quarterly reports detailing type, volume, and origin of material, as well as market conditions and changes in end uses. Written criteria for evaluation will be the total number of tons diverted through this program, and the diversion rate achieved based on current estimations of overall generation. 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources: Costs of preparing reports will be included in program costs. Costs of,reviewing and evaluating reports are included in administrative costs. 10. Remedial Measures: If this program does not.achieve the projected diversion rates, the County shall conduct a study of ,the deficiencies in the program and make recommendations to correct the situation. Remedial measures may include increased public education,alterations in the collection system to make it more convenient, and increased enforcement of mandatory separation in the medium term period. Selected Program 2: Multi-family 1 Background Smaller apartment buildings (6 units and under) and condominiums that have separate garbage cans for each unit may be easily integrated into a curbside program serving single-family residences. However, larger apartment buildings and condominium, complexes that,have centralized garbage storage facilities generally require centralized recycling storage and separate or modified collection systems. There are approximately 6,900 single family attached and multi-family units of 5 units or more in the unincorporated areas of the County (California Department of Finance statistic), or approximately 12% of the housing units in the unincorporated areas. The Waste Generation Study does not separately characterize multi-family residential wastes. However,.other waste generation studies, such as the City of Berkeley's 1989 study, have shown 1i . Apr 1 199 3 S- 45 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE �, Recycling Component little difference between single family and multi-family dwellings' generation rates or composition, except that multi-family dwellings usually produce less yard debris and therefore less waste overall.. Several different storage and collection systems are now in use in apartment buildings and condominiums within our County. The most common method is to locate wheeled carts (usually 90 gallon capacity) near elevators or garbage containers, and collect materials with a front loader or curbside vehicle fitted with a lift for the cart; another is to locate a bin near the garbage container, either divided for separate materials, or not divided for commingled materials. The most successful programs are those that deal with individual buildings and complexes on a case by case basis, and which are able to offer building managers different options for central storage, and work with managers to design the system. ' Perhaps the greatest constraint on apartment and condominium recycling is space for the storage of materials within individual units, and for central storage containers. For buildings with garbage chutes, finding a suitable, accessible location for recycling containers may be a problem. Furthermore, many apartment and condominium managers hesitate to devote valuable parking lot space to recycling bins. All the major haulers in the County that serve the unincorporated areas already have, or are implementing, apartment and condominium recycling programs in nearly all the unincorporated communities. The County should, however, ensure that future developments include in their design adequate storage space, both within units and at a central location, for recycled materials (see Selected Program 6). The County may, in the Medium-term, require expanded or enhanced programs, such as mandatory source separation of materials from these and other sources, in order to meet diversion mandates. The County should, therefore, retain adequate control over franchising and letting of contracts to ensure that this option and other medium-term design options can be exercised. This may be done by granting only limited-term franchises or contracts for recycling (no more than 5 years), or by stipulating program review and redesign early in.the medium-term period. 1. Proposed Program Description: Franchised haulers are currently implementing apartment and condominium recycling, and should continue to do so. Currently, the County only franchises for two communities, Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg. The County will be in a better position to direct and monitor multi-family recycling programs after franchise agreements or MOU's are developed. Subscription for refuse collection is mandatory for the unincorporated areas of the County. ' Therefore, the County shall ensure that where residents have regular refuse collection service that they will have regular recycling service. In the rural areas of East County where multi-family units have regular refuse collection, the viability of bi-weekly or monthly collection will be explored. Otherwise, it is preferable that programs collect weekly, on the same day as regular refuse collection. The establishment of drop-off facilities may be considered to serve areas for which regular collection of recyclables is not feasible. ' Contra Costa County 5- 46 April 1993 Final.Draft SRRE Recycling Component Where there is overlap of service areas, the County will work with the franchised hauler and appropriate city to coordinate services in an effort to assure the most cost-effective program to the ratepayers. In the short term, the current programs provided or planned by the waste haulers will continue. After an evaluation of existing multi-family recycling programs, based on design criteria and participation rates, any necessary changes needed to meet mandated diversion rates will be ' implemented. OCC, tin, and colored HDPE will be added to programs not currently collecting these materials. In the medium term, two crucial issues must be decided: whether to require householders to separate their recyclables (mandatory recycling); and whether to add mixed paper and high grade ledger to materials collected. In addition, facilities and processing capacity along with ' collection vehicles will be assessed to determine the optimum level of source separation and the most appropriate collection vehicles. 2. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates: No operating data are yet available for existing programs. The existing and planned programs are, however, appropriate for the short term planning period. In the medium term, materials ' collected shall be expanded to include cardboard, mixed paper, and high-grade paper. Presently, PHBD, CDS, VWM, and RSS all collect or plan to collect newsprint, glass, PET and HDPE plastics, and aluminum and tin cans. In addition, PHBD will accept small pieces of OCC. ' Expected capture rates: Multi-family programs are expected to serve approximately 10% of the `unincorporated population. Average capture rates for targeted materials are expected to be similar to those for the curbside program, and are therefore included in the curbside projections. ' 3. Methods for handling and disposal: No significant residues will be produced by this program. f 4. End-uses: , See evaluation of targeted materials in Section V. 5. Necessary facilities: i Current processing facilities operated by Concord Disposal, PHBD, VWM, and RSS are ,sufficient to handle materials in the short term. Some modifications and expansions may be necessary in the medium term to handle increased volumes and number of materials. April 1993 5- 47 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 6. Costs: a. Public Sector Included in Single Family Curbside administrative and oversight costs. b. Private Sector Since programs are defined more by the haulers' territories than by jurisdictional ' boundaries, and since under the current franchise structures there are few reporting requirements, it is very difficult to assess the private sector's costs for this and other , programs. However, capital and operating costs will be recovered by the private sector through service fees. Where the County franchises `directly, it should ensure that rate structures accurately reflect the costs of this and other recycling programs. Where ' sanitary districts are the franchising agencies, the County should find means of compelling them to provide accurate program costs and how proposed rate structures reflect these. Expansion of service to other materials in the medium term is expected to decrease collection efficiency by approximately 20%. However, new developments in truck design may lower this figure. ' 7. Monitoring: Program monitoring shall be effected through stringent reporting requirements for all programs affecting the unincorporated areas. Reporting shall include monthly totals of weights of the materials collected, origin of material, disposition of the material, and , general trends in the program. Reports shall be submitted quarterly to the Community Development Department. S. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources: Costs of preparing reports are considered program costs. The County's role in monitoring and evaluation will require approximately .1 FTE. s ' 9. Remedial Measures: If this program fails to achieve projected diversion levels, the County shall conduct an inquiry to access its deficiencies and suggest methods for improvement. Selected Program ##3: Drop-off Centers Background Drop-off centers are recycling facilities that collect secondary materials from the public at a central location. Drop-off centers have low operating and capital costs, and can collect a wider variety of materials than a curbside collection program. For more sparsely populated areas where traveling distances greatly affect the economics of a curbside collection operation, drop-off centers are an Contra Costa County 5- 48 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component r appropriate option, and can be scaled according to usage. •High-density population areas not easily ' served by curbside collection, such as apartments, trailer parks, condominium complexes, and high- security communities are also prime locations for drop-off programs. Within the unincorporated areas, possible areas for drop-off facilities include, in East County, the rural communities of Byron, Knightsen, Sandhill, Bethel Island, and at strategic locations such as crossroads in the range and pasture areas on the North and East slopes of Mt. Diablo, as well as in Discovery Bay. In Central County, appropriate locations include Clyde, Alhambra Valley and Reliez Valley, Alamo, Blackhawk, Tassajara and other rural areas on the south slope of Mt. Diablo, and, if they are inaccessible to curbside vehicles, the trailer parks of Pacheco and West Pittsburg. In West County, appropriate locations include Rodeo, Crockett, Kensington, Montalvin Manor/Tara Hills, in strategic locations in the rural and semi-rural areas around Briones Park, and, depending on physical layout and accessibility, the condominium complexes and mobile home parks in Montalvin Manor/Tara Hills. Drop-off centers can compliment curbside programs by providing another option for recycling as well as offering recovery of more materials. Providing drop-off sites when a curbside program is ' available adds to a program's overall convenience, such as when a citizen misses a collection day or is planning to be out of town, and when storage space for recyclables is limited. Drop-off facilities also can be used to expand the.types of materials a program accepts by providing a place for hard-to-collect materials, such as plastics, mixed paper, and cardboard, and seasonally or annually produced materials, such as Christmas trees, Hanukkah bushes, and telephone books. Drop-off facilities play an important role in recycling and can compliment, and in some cases, such as in sparsely populated rural areas, even replace curbside programs. Drop-offs offer the advantages of having low operating costs and low capital requirements. Full-scale drop-off centers have the ability to recover a wide variety of materials, and have the possibility to serve as community centers. With proper design and operation, drop-offs can be an effective means of recovering materials. Drop-off programs are the most common form of community-based recycling, and.the majority of programs are run by nonprofit groups as fundraisers. ' 1. Design considerations The most crucial design considerations for drop-off facilities are location and scale. Scale: Drop-off facilities range from relatively large, full-service, staffed facilities, such as the City of El Cerrito's, which include processing facilities for both drop-off and curbside materials, and which accept a wide array of materials, to a simple placement of one or two bins, perhaps for newspaper and cardboard only, placed strategically in parking lots, at crossroads, along well-trafficed avenues, and at the gates of residential developments. Location: A location within convenient proximity to the populations being served is essential to the success of a drop-off facility. Facilities need not be located in high visibility areas, but should April 1993 5- 49 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component • i be strategically located close to major thoroughfares, commercial areas, and intersections. Sites should have adequate space to accommodate vehicle and foot traffic, as well as materials handling equipment.. Unstaffed facilities may experience problems of dumping of mixed wastes, scavenging of ' materials, and high contamination levels. To some extent, these problems can be mitigated through public education, clear signage at the site, cooperation with law enforcement agencies for increasing patrols around sites, frequent servicing of bins, and basic security measures, such as fences and locking gates. 2. Program Description Drop-off centers are an essential component of the residential recycling strategy, as they will give residents a second choice for recycling.certain curbside materials, and their only choice to recycle materials not collected at curbside. In addition, some rural areas may not be served by curbside collection at all, and for them drop-off may provide their only recycling opportunity. The drop-off program will consist of an expansion and regulation of the existing network of bin placements, and the establishment of several full-service centers. Appropriate bin locations will be researched by staff. No rent shall be paid for bin placements. When appropriate bin locations are identified, either the franchised recycler, or if there is none, a recycler chosen on a rotational basis from a list of those providing such services in the area, will be contacted, and arrangements will be made for placing and servicing containers. Recyclers will be required to report on types, volumes, frequency of pick-up, and problems associated with each placement. In the event that a placement does not generate sufficient volumes of materials to cover costs plus an agreed-upon profit margin, the County will review possible incentives to assist recyclers. At least three materials will be collected at each site: corrugated cardboard newsprint, and g P glass. In addition, recyclers may choose to collect any other materials. The second part of the drop-off program is the establishment of two new full-service drop-off centers. These centers will accept a broad range of materials at centers located on fenced, paved lots. Staffing will be part-time, and no processing facilities will be -located at the centers. Rather, materials will be hauled to another facility for densification and other processing. The centers will be located in Oakley and in Alamo. In addition, the new buy-back in El Sobrante will receive materials on a donation basis. These centers will accept cardboard, newsprint, high grade ledger, magazines, mixed .paper, HDPE and PET plastic, glass, aluminum cans and scrap, and tin cans and ferrous scrap. Other materials may be accepted as well, either on an experimental, seasonal, or ongoing basis. The centers may be developed by the County, with operations contracted out, run by the County, or developed and operated under contract to a non-profit or for-profit business. An appropriate design may be one similar to the Valcor drop-off center in Vallejo, where residents J Contra Costa County 5- 50 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component can donate materials to the community organization of their choice. Each participating ' organization maintains its own bins in its own portion of the yard. Center staff weigh and combine all materials, which are then marketed by Valcor, and the proceeds credited to each organization. In the,event that operations are contracted out, the County will review possible ' incentives to assist.the recycler. 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates rAll materials noted are from the residential waste stream. However, a small amount of materials from the commercial waste stream may be captured through this program. In ' addition, some materials from adjacent jurisdictions will be captured. Medium term capture rates will improve due to increased public awareness and mandatory source separation. r April 1993 5- 51 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Drop-Offs: Short Term and Medium Term Projected Capture Rates (Residential Waste Stream Only) Material Type ST Capture MT Capture Rate Rate Paper Corrugated 10% 15% Newsprint 10% 8% High Grade 3% 5% Mixed paper 3% 5% Plastic HDPE 5% 7% PET 5% 5% Glass CA Redemption 7% 8% Other recyclable 7% 8% Metal Aluminum cans 2% 2% Tin/Fe 8% 12% Non-Fe and Al 7% 9% scrap The total diversion from the residential waste stream achieved through this program is expected to reach 2.8% short term, and 3.4% medium term, equivalent to 1.5% and 1.8% of the entire waste stream. 4. Methods for handling and disposal: Little or no residue is expected. Any residues will be produced at processing facilities equipped to handle them. 5. End-uses: See Section V. Contra Costa County 5-52 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 6. Necessary facilities: ' Two new facilities will be required for this program, the full-service drop-off centers in Alamo and Oakley. These facilities will require no permanent structures, and only minimal site ' improvement. 7. Costs: rThe bin system will require funds for program administration and for the program subsidy. The full-service facilities will require both capital and operational expenses. Bin system: Start-up costs: ' 1 FTE for 6 months $24,000. Annual operating costs: .2 FTE $9,600 Full-Service Facilities Capital Costs: Administration: 1 FTE for 6 months $24,000 Land, improvements, equipment: $90,000 each $180,000 Annual operating costs: Administration: .2 FTE $9,600 2 PT staff for facilities (1 FTE @ $20,000) $20,000 Total Ca ital costs, both parts of program: $228,000 Total annual operating costs: $39,200 Annual operating costs will be partially or wholly offset through the sale of materials. ' 8. Monitoring: Strict reporting will be required for all private contractors. Reports will detail type, amount, ' and where possible, origin of material. County staff will compile this data, which will be used for evaluating the program as a whole, as well as for the performance of each drop-off site and each recycler. 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources: Reporting costs will be considered operational costs. Staff time for monitoring and evaluation is included under program administration. 10. Remedial Measures: In the event the program does not achieve expected diversion levels, the expectations themselves will be reevaluated in the light of operational .experience and effects of other - Contra Costa County April 1993 S 53 ry Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component programs. Furthermore, if the program develops as one involving several recyclers, economies of scale and collection efficiencies will be evaluated. A thorough evaluation of the program should be performed toward the end of the short-term planning period. Selected Program #f4: Buy-Backs Background Buy-backs are recycling facilities that purchase secondary (i.e., used and discarded) materials from the public. Buy-backs offer a direct economic incentive to producers of valuable secondary materials to segregate, prepare, and transport those materials to the recycling facility. Buy-backs have several unique advantages: since they purchase materials from the public, they serve as a hub of small-scale economic activity, and may serve small businesses such as bars and restaurants, residents wishing to get the maximum return from their recyclables, and low-income, residents who make or supplement their living collecting and selling secondary materials. Furthermore, since buy-backs are able to specify and enforce the preparation requirements and contaminants tolerances of materials, the materials they purchase and process are generally very pure. Third, buy-backs can be run at a profit, and so can be used to .subsidize other recycling programs run by the same firm as the buy-back, or, if the buy-back is operated by a non-profit, profits can be returned to the community. Buy-backs.ara particularly app ro riate recycling proram option in working class and relatively low-income areas, where residents seek to maximize return from the sale of their secondary materials, and where curbside participation rates may be low (assuming the validity of studies that positively correlate low income with low participation rates). Crockett, Rodeo, Montara, and North Richmond are prime candidates for buy-backs. Buy-backs differ from AB 2020 convenience centers in that they,usually pay both the redemption value for CRV beverage containers and a portion of the scrap value of the container. Most full-scale buy-backs are, however, certified redemption centers, and receive processing fees and incentive payments from the redemption program. Buy-backs target only materials for which there exists a viable market. As a service to their customers, some buy-backs accept on a drop-off basis low-value materials on which they will only break even or even lose money, such as mixed paper and expanded polystyrene (EPS). Buy-backs may purchase a wide array of high-value secondary materials, such as: aluminum cans and scrap aluminum, other non-ferrous metals, glass (usually color sorted), newsprint (ONP), cardboard (OCC), high-grade paper, and plastic soda bottles (PET). Volumes of materials purchased generally reflect prices; for example, when newsprint prices drop, fewer people bother to collect and bring in this material, and there are fewer newspaper drives by the Boy Scouts and other organizations. 1. Design Considerations: There are several design parameters to consider for buy-backs: a. Materials accepted b. Service area and population(siting in a strategic location) c. Whether the program requires price supports or subsidies Contra Costa County April 1993S- 54 A Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component d. Hours of operation e. Whether the facility will be combined with a drop-off facility accepting a wider variety tof materials f.. Processing facilities (densification, baling, materials handling, transportation, covered space) g. Operation by private-for-profit, private non-profit, or public-private partnership h. Accessibility and traffic patterns i. Whether the buy-back will have a permanent site, or will be mobile. ' j. Certified redemption center? Mobile Buy-Backs Mobile buy-backs areessentiallycurbside recycling trucks equipped with a scale and a driver who also purchases materials. Mobile buy-backs are particularly appropriate for serving several small communities that would not in themselves be able to support a permanent facility, for serving low income areas where curbside collection could be expected to experience low levels of participation and high levels of scavenging, and for.serving high crime areas, since materials could be transported to a safe location each day. Mobile buy-backs can be operated as satellites of permanent facilities, • or can be operated as a distinct program, with materials delivered to an established processing facility. 2. Program Description: g P ' Currently, the unincorporated areas of the County are.surprisingly poorly served with buy- backs. Only the northern portion of Central County and northern portion of East County presently have full-service buy-backs (see existing conditions section). West County, and ' particularly the communities of El Sobrante, Rodeo, Crockett, Port Costa, North Richmond, East Richmond Heights, Rollingwood, and Montara are not within reasonable proximity of a full service buy-back. The South Central unincorporated communities, and Discovery Bay in East. County, are not within close proximity to a buy-back facility either. Since these communities are more affluent than the West County communities., however, drop-offs are probably a better alternative to serve as a back-up for curbside programs. ' West County in articular requires additional buy-back facilities, and a new facility should be P designed and put in place as quickly as possible. To some extent, the currently grim situation will improve when and if RSS opens their buy-back at the end of Parr Boulevard. However, this location is relatively remote and inaccessible for many unincorporated West County residents. In order to serve the communities of North Richmond, Crockett, Rodeo, and El Sobrante, the County shall establish a mobile buy-back program. The program will consist of a single vehicle, operated seven days per week. The vehicle will have a set schedule, and visit one or two locations each day. The mobile buy-back will purchase aluminum, including scrap aluminum, glass, newsprint, and, if the truck design permits, cardboard and high grades of ' paper. In addition, if truck design permits, the program will receive HDPE plastics and tin cans. ' 3 5- 55 Contra Costa County April 199 ry Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component In addition, the County will seek to establish a buy-back facility in El Sobrante. The El Sobrante facility should be designed as a full-service recycling center, with both buy-back and drop-off facilities. It should have extended evening and weekend hours. The facility could have equipment and facilities for densification, baling, materials handling, and secure storage. This location would serve the unincorporated areas of West County, as well as the Cities of Richmond, Pinole, Hercules, and San Pablo. The mobile buy-back should operate as a satellite of the El Sobrante facility, with deliveries made to the facility at the end of each day. There are several options for ownership and operation of the program: it may be owned and operated by the County; owned by the County, but privately operated under contract; or owned and operated by a private entity. There would be some benefit to having a non-profit operate the program, as the program would then lack a profit motive, and excess revenues could be returned to the communities that the facilities serve. This return of revenues could be either through adjusting scrap prices upward ' to a break-even point, by paying a premium to other non-profits and community groups'selling materials to the program, or by sharing profits with local community groups. Whoever operates the program, accountability and reporting are essential, and the operating contract ' must specify full reporting of costs and tonnages. 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates: This program will target materials primarily from the residential waste stream, primarily aluminum, PET plastic, glass, newsprint, and cardboard. In addition,the program will recover some materials from the commercial waste stream. The program can be expected to serve the incorporated areas of West County. The capture rates below only reflect materials from the unincorporated areas; materials from the incorporated areas can be expected to be approximately triple the tonnage of materials originating in the unincorporated areas. a a Contra Costa County 5- 56 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Buy-Backs: Short Term and Medium Term ' Projected Capture Rates (Residential Waste Stream Only) ' Material Type ST Capture MT Capture Rate Rate Paper Corrugated 5% 8% 1 Newsprint 3% 4% . High Grade 2% 3% Plastic HDPE 3% 4% PET 5% 10% e Glass CA Redemption 5% 6% Other recyclable 4% 5% ' Metal Aluminum cans 10% 12% Tin/Fe 2% 3% Non-Fe and Al 3% 4% r , scrap 4. Methods for handling and disposal. ' Materials bought and accepted. as donations will be closely monitored for cleanliness and purity. Therefore, the program will have a very low residue level, requiring no special means of handling and disposal. Handling of the recyclables themselves will be accomplished either at an existing facility, or at a facility developed in conjunction with this program. Since materials will be highly source separated, handling will be greatly simplified, and consist of grading, densification, baling, stacking or bagging, and shipping. 5. End-uses See descriptions of targeted materials in Section V. April 1993. 5- 57 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component 6. Necessary facilities This program will require a center for processing collected materials. Either an existing facility, such as RSS's, or a new facility, described below in the Drop-off section, will be utilized. , 7. Costs El Sobrante Buy-Back: Capital Costs: Site improvement: $80,000 Equipment: $100,000 Office Trailer: $30,000 TOTAL $210,000 Annual Operating Expenses: Manager: $45,000 Supervisor: $30,000 Yard workers: 4 FTE @ $8/hr $64,000 TOTAL .$139,000 Mobile Buy-Back Capital costs: 1 modified curbside truck, w/scale, extra bins $100,000. Program design and implementation: .25 FTE, 6 mths: 6;000. Total Capital Costs: $106,000. Annual Operating Costs: , 1.5 drivers @$15/hr. $45,000. Truck operation and maintenance $18,000. Total annual operating costs: $63,000. a Revenues from the.sale of materials can be expected to offset approximately annual operating costs, depending on market conditions. a 8. Monitoring The program operator will be required through contractual or franchise agreements to report quarterly on monthly tonnage figures, broken down by material type and origin of materials. This information will be submitted to the Community Development Department, which will analyze the data and compile it into an annual report on diversion programs. The criteria for evaluation are total tons diverted from the unincorporated area's waste stream, and net program cost per ton. Contra Costa County 5- 58 APril 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component a 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources. Monitoring costs are included in the operator's administrative costs. In addition, monitoring will require approximately .1% FTE of a Community Development Department analyst. ' 10. Remedial Measures ' If the program does not achieve the projected rates of diversion by early in the medium term planning period, the program will be reevaluated on the basis of the amount of materials diverted, how the program compliments or interferes with other recycling programs, and the ' net cost of the program. Commercial and Industrial Programs Selected Program #5: Expand Commercial and Industrial Collection Routes Background Together, commercial and industrial sources account for nearly half of the waste stream. Commercial and industrial waste streams are generally more homogeneous(fewer material types)and richer (higher percentage of recyclable materials) than residential wastes. Where commercial and industrial developments are of sufficient density it is feasible to establish regular collection routes for several materials, particularly cardboard, glass, and high grade paper. Cardboard is the single most important target material for commercial and industrial programs. Cardboard makes up 13.4% ' of the commercial waste stream and 26.9% of the industrial waste stream (for a total of 10.9% of the total waste stream). 1. Design Considerations: Collection from commercial and industrial sources may be accomplished in several ways: ' • Multi-material collection from small businesses may be done with regular curbside collection equipment. Storage at the site would be in wheeled carts, and collection trucks equipped with hydraulic lifts. This method is suitable for collection from relatively dense developments of small businesses, such as San Pablo Dam Road in El Sobrante. • Multi material collection using a front loader and bins. Undivided bins can be used for single material collections, such as cardboard from a retail establishment or glass from bars and restaurants, or for commingled materials if processing facilities are available. Divided bins are also available that correspond to a longitudinally divided bed on the collection vehicle. This allows for relatively efficient collection of several -source- separated materials. The Cities of Sunnyvale and Berkeley are using this system for commercial collection. ' • Where volumes are sufficient supermarkets(e.g., and industrial facilities), roll-on roll-off containers may be used. Compacting containers are also available. ' Aril 1993 5- 59 Contra Costa County ty Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Only where densities and overall extent of development are sufficient to employ one of the first two methods is contracting or franchising necessary. Otherwise, a free market situation, in which individual businesses contract with individual recyclers or haulers,may be the most efficient system. In the unincorporated areas, no single community is of sufficient size to warrant the purchase of special equipment and the institution of regular routes, unless communities are grouped together, or programs are combined with adjoining jurisdictions. An additional element to commercial routes is the provision of bins for recyclables in , public places where materials are likely to be generated in volume, such as along commercial streets with heavy foot traffic, at bus stops and train stations, and in small, street corner parks. 2. Program Description Currently all of the major haulers in the unincorporated areas are planning or implementing commercial programs. These programs are similar to one another in that the haulers are contacting businesses individually, and setting up collection arrangements on a case-by-case basis. It is very difficult to assess the effectiveness and cost parameters of the program at this time, since the programs are nascent. Since the private sector has taken the initiative, however, the best course is to encourage the development of those programs already planned or being implemented, to monitor them closely, and to be prepared to make changes during the medium term. In addition to pick-up from commercial and industrial sources per se, the County will require in all franchise agreements that haulers provide recycling bins in public areas. Bins will be provided for glass, aluminum; and newsprint. The success of this aspect of the program is dependent upon a strong public education campaign, including clear marking of bins. Scavenging of materials will be allowed. 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates a Current programs include pick-up of cardboard, glass, high-grade ledger paper, and aluminum cans. In the medium term, pick-up shall be expanded to include several other commercial materials: newsprint, mixed paper, and whatever grades of plastic then having a market. 8 U a Contra Costa County 5- 60 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Commercial and Industrial Routes: Short Term and Medium Term Capture Rates Material Commercial Industrial Capture Rate Capture Rate '(ST/MT) (ST/MT) Paper: Cardboard 25/30 35/60 Newsprint -430 --/-- High Grade 0/40 30/50 Mixed Paper 420 --/-- Plastic: HDPE 430 --/-- LDPE 415 --/-- EPS 45 --I-- Glass (all) 30/40 --/-- Metal Aluminum 30/40 --/-- Scrap 20/40 --/-- 4. Methods for handling and disposal Only commingled materials will produce any significant residues. Existing processing facilities are equipped to handle disposal of such residues. 5. End-uses See Section V. 6. Necessary facilities No new facilities will be required for this program. 7. Costs Unknown and unknowable private sector costs, as long as programs transcend jurisdictional boundaries, and are uncontrolled. Administrative costs for program coordination are .3 FTE for two years, .2 FTE thereafter. Start-up Costs: .3 FTE for two years: $14,400 Annual Costs: .2 FTE: $9,600 April.1993 5- 61 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 8. Monitoring The County shall seek to regulate and monitor program development by establishing franchises, , or by other means. Haulers must be compelled to report quarterly on the volume, type, and origin of materials collected, on processing methods, and on markets and market development activities. The criterion for program evaluation will be the gross tonnage of materials marketed from this program. 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources Reporting is considered a part of the private sector's program costs. Oversight is considered a part of program coordination costs. 10. Remedial Measures Should the program not achieve expected diversion levels, the storage and collection technologies, the outreach to businesses by the haulers and by the County, and the materials selected will all be studied, evaluated, and where necessary, alterations in program design will be made. Selected Program #6: Land Use Permits, Building Inspection and Codes Background An impediment to recycling for many generators of materials is storage space. Single family homes, apartment buildings, condominiums, office buildings, retail establishments, eating establishments, industrial facilities, and other structures and facilities may lack adequate space for storage of source separated recyclables. The County can ensure that space is available in new construction, by amend ing'building codes and making stipulations in land use permits. 1. Design Considerations: a Not Applicable. n 2. Program description O The County shall amend the building code to require adequate space for storage of recyclable a materials in all new construction, as well as in all remodeling involving residential kitchen space. Specifically: a a. Amend Building Code to require the applicant to design areas adequate for storage of recyclables. b. Multi-family complexes will have adequate storage space on each floor of a multi-story building, or by each garbage receptacle. Contra Costa County 5- 62 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Lc. Office buildings will be require d to have adequate storage for paper recycling bins at loading docks. d. Eating and retail establishments will be required to have adeq nate storage space for recyclables at the same location as that used for garbage storage. As a condition of land use permits, all commercial and industrial facilities requiring a land use permit will be required to specify in their designs adequate storage space for source separated recyclables. Furthermore, any facilities requiring a land use permit shall be required, as a condition of that permit, to submit an evaluation of projected wastes produced at the facility, and means of mitigating the disposal stream from that facility through source reduction, recycling and composting. This program will require researching and drafting specific building code amendments, and ongoing staff time for making specific stipulations for land use permits. The program should be implemented as quickly.as possible. 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates: ' This program will not in itself result in materials diverted, but will remove an institutional impediment to the success of other programs. 4. Methods for handling and disposal: Not applicable. ' S. End-uses: Not applicable. 6. Necessary facilities: None. 7. Costs: Costs include initial staff to research and draft amendments to the building code, and continuing staff time to enforce new codes. In addition, continuing, sporadic staff time will be required to ensure that the proper stipulations are made to land use permits. Start-up Costs: Staff time: 1 FTE for 2 months: $8,000 Annual Costs: Building inspectors will experience minor additional workload. .05 FTE to implement land use permit policies: $2,400 April 1993 5- 63 Contra Costa County Final Drat SRRE Recycling Component 8. Monitoring: The program will be monitored through the Building Inspection Department, and through the ' Community Development Department for land use permits. The Building Inspection Department will be required to report annually on compliance with the new codes, and on problems encountered and suggestions for modifications. i 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources: Costs for monitoring and evaluation will be minimal, as tasks will be performed by existing staff. 10. Remedial Measures: In the event that this program fails to achieve its goal of facilitating recycling activities, the program will be evaluated to determine what, if any, remedial measures are necessary. A thorough program evaluation should be performed at the end of the short term planning period. Selected Program #7 Direct Linkages Background Direct linkages are achieved when individual generators of a recyclable material and the end user of that material establish a direct exchange relationship. Such relationships may be ephemeral, perhaps lasting for only one or two transactions, or long-term, such as when a large commercial or D industrial establishment establishes a contract with an end user. Another variation on this form of recycling involves intermediary "service providers," usually specialized materials handlers who act as an agent to purchase, refine, transport, broker, or market materials. 1. Design considerations The County can play a role in direct linkages by facilitating the establishment of these relationships, and by monitoring them. Program options range from a high-end program, involving direct assistance to generators to assist them in identifying waste types and potential end-users, and assisting them in establishing contractual agreements, to a low-end program providing information only. 2. Program Description The County shall establish and maintain an information data base listing four types of entities: generators of large volumes of recyclable materials; service providers; local end users; and established waste exchanges. Through a public education program, the existence and uses of this database will be communicated to commercial and industrial establishments in the unincorporated areas. The County will establish a hotline for providing access to the data base. Furthermore, the resources of the database will be made available to recipients of the waste audit program. Contra Costa County 5- 64 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component One aspect of this program will be assisting businesses in setting up office paper recycling ' programs. In addition to providing information on service providers and end users for generators of office paper,, the County will lend assistance in the form of a printed guide on establishing an office paper recycling program, and offices will be eligible for waste audits. This program shall be implemented in the short term, and may be integrated with other essentially informational programs. For example, the hotline and hotline staff, as well as the database software, may be used for several programs. Thisro ram would be most cost effective if it served the entire count not just the P g Y� J unincorporated areas. 3. Materials Targeted, expected capture rates To some extent; this program will overlap with the commercial and industrial routes program, since the established haulers will be considered service providers, and some materials may end up being collected on established routes. This program will, however, also target generators of materials not targeted for established routes, such as generators of relatively large volumes of scrap plastic, pallets and wood debris, concrete and rubble, and special grades of paper (such as specialized printing grades.) Direct Linkages: Short Term and Medium Term Capture Rates from the Commercial and Industrial Waste Streams Material Commercial Industrial Capture Rate Capture Rate (ST/MT) (ST/MT) Paper: Cardboard 5/10 10/15 Newsprint --/-- --/-- High Grade 30/35 30/40 Mixed Paper 10/15 --/-- Plastic: HDPE 10/20 --/-- LDPE 10/15 --/-- EPS 5/10 --/-- Glass (all) 10/15 --/-- Metal Aluminum 10/20 --/-- Scrap 10/20 --/-- Inert Solids , 10/20 15/25 Wood Wastes --/-- 20/25. April 1993 5- 65 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component 4. Methods for handling and disposal. Not applicable. ' 5. End-uses See Section V. 6. Necessary facilities None. 7. Costs Program costs include establishing and maintaining the database, the costs of equipment and staff for the hotline, and the outreach program. The outreach program costs are considered in the EPI Component. The capital costs are fixed, and would differ little if the program were countywide, with the exception that establishing the initial database would require approximately double the staff time. Staffing levels for operations would also have to be approximately doubled. Capital Costs Develop initial database: 1 FTE, 6 months: $24,000 Purchase software: $8,000 Establish hotline system (includes hardware): $30,000 Total capital costs: $62,000 Annual Operating Costs: Maintain database: .2 FTE $9.600 Operate hotline: .3 FTE (other .7 from other hotline programs) $14,400 Equipment maintenance, phone lines: $6,000 Total annual operating costs: $30,000 8. Monitoring Recipients of hotline information will be requested to report on relationships established and quantities diverted, and an ongoing database of this information will be maintained. Furthermore, the hotline staff will conduct an annual survey, using a random sampling of callers to the hotline, service providers, and end users, to determine the overall effectiveness of the program. The written criteria for evaluation will be: 1. the number of linkages facilitated through the program; and 2. the amount, type, and origin of materials recycled or otherwise diverted through these linkages. ■ Contra Costa County 5- 66 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component ' 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources. Ongoing data collection is considered part of operating costs. The annual survey will require additional staff resources of approximately .5 FTE for one month. 10. Remedial Measures In the event that this program does not achieve the projected levels of diversion, all program raspects shall be evaluated, and recommendations made to modify or end the program. ' Selected Program #/8 Source Separation of Con structibn/Demolition Debris Background Construction/demolition debris may consist of many material types, but it is dominated by wood waste and inert solids, both of which may be recovered. Inert solids constitute 12.2% of the total waste stream and wood waste makes up 14.3%. Much of the tonnage quantified for both waste types can be attributed to construction/demolition debris, and source separation by construction/demolition debris generators would increase the potential for recovery of these materials. Several businesses in the county, as County Quarry,process construction/demolition debris. The ACME Interim Transfer Station operator is required, as per Conditions of Approval, to remove from ' disposal woodwaste and construction/demolition debris. At the West County Landfill, construction/demolition loads that contain primarily one material type are being diverted. 1. Design considerations Source separation of construction/demolition debris will require modifications in the behavior of those generating the material, and modifications to the collection system. The former might best be accomplished through the land use permit process and building inspection process; the latter through experimentation and flexibility. 2. Program Description The County will develop a policy that requires as part of Conditions of Approval and building inspection approval the separation of recyclable material on the job site. The County will develop and provide public information to assist in the recycling of construction/demolition material. Staff will work with one or more haulers and private construction/demolition recyclers in the unincorporated areas to test the feasibility of source separating construction demolition debris. Two systems will be explored: design and construction of a divided roll-on roll-off container; and provision of multiple containers. Aril 1993 S- 67 Contra Costa County h' Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component 3. Materials targeted, expected capture rates: This program will target primarily wood wastes and inert solids from the commercial and industrial waste streams. Capture rates are as follows: Material Short Term Medium Term Capture Rate Capture Rate Wood Waste 5% 30% Inert Solids 5% 40% 4. Methods for handling and disposal. Materials will be delivered to existing wood grinding and rock crushing facilities. No additional handling and disposal facilities will be required. 5. End-uses Ground wood wastes will be separated into fines and overs. Fines may be used as a soil amendment; overs may be used for fuel, or as a bulking agent in composting processes. Inert solids will be crushed and used as aggregate or in road beds. a 6. Necessary facilities Existing facilities will be utilized. 7. Costs Program administrative costs only: .3 FTE for 6 months, then .1 FTE. Start-up Costs .3 FTE for 6 mths: $7,200 Annual Costs 1 FTE: $4,800 8. Monitoring Successful monitoring of this program will be based on requirements of Land Use Permits and a Building Inspection Permits. Participating haulers will be required to report the number and percentage of accounts utilizing the source separation service; the amount and types of materials recovered; and the actual end uses. for materials. Contra Costa County 5- 68 April 1993 Final Drat SRRE Recycling Component , 9. Monitoring and evaluation costs and revenue sources These costs will be considered as part of program administrative costs. 10. Remedial Measures, In the event that this program does not achieve the projected levels of diversion, all program aspects shall be evaluated, and recommendations made to modify the program. ' Other Programs' Selected Program ##9 1 Schools and Other Organizations Background' Providing opportunities for young people and adults to participate directly in recycling programs allows them to incorporate such activities more fully into their lives. For this purpose, the County will expand its Schools Recycling Program and will assist community/church organizations in recycling activities and in obtaining equipment from waste haulers or recycling businesses. Several cities, and the Central Contra Costa Sanitation District, are already working with school . . districts to implement recycling programs and curricula. The County will cooperate with these agencies and their efforts to ensure that high-quality programs exist in all schools serving the unincorporated areas. 1. Program Description The Schools Recycling Program links schools, waste haulers, and businesses in a recycling partnership. The County provides a curriculum and assists in identifying the materials and equipment necessary to implement recycling. The County also assists in obtaining private business support to supply the students with "Green Team" T-shirts. During 1990-91, 18 schools participated in the County's Schools Recycling Program. Two schools which were monitored as part of the evaluation collected 7,475 lbs. and 5,526 lbs. of recyclables. The County will work with community organizations to identify materials targeted for recycling and the organizations' preferred use of the materials, such as fundraising. The County will assist the organizations in working with waste haulers or recycling businesses to obtain the necessary equipment for recycling activities. 2. Materials Targeted and expected Capture Rates The Schools Recycling Program is a multi-materials • recycling effort targeting paper, cardboard, aluminum cans, polystyrene food trays, and milk and juice boxes. The community organizations recycling effort will target mixed paper, newspaper, cardboard, aluminum cans, plastic beverage containers, and glass. April 1993 5- 69 Contra Costa County. Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component Except for the evaluation of the Schools Recycling Program cited above, capture rates for these programs are not possible to quantify at this time. Evaluation of these programs will include developing methods to determine capture and diversion rates. 3. Methods for Handling and Disposal No special residue.problems will result from these programs. 4. End Uses ' See Section V. 5 Necessary Facilities No new facilities are required for these programs. 6. Costs The Coun will incur administrative costs of .1 FTE or 4 800 annually. ty $ y If revenues from the sale of recyclables collected are less than costs to implement recycling, then participants will have to fund such costs. 7. Monitoring The County will track the progress of these programs working with schools, community groups, and waste haulers to obtain data on diversion rates. 8. Monitoring and Evaluation costs and revenue sources Monitoring and evaluation costs are part of program administration. Revenue will come from the Resource Recovery Fees required of the ACME Transfer Station and of the two new landfills.since these programs impact the diversion rates of the County and of the cities. 1 9. Remedial Measures The programs will be evaluated at the end of the short-term atwhi h time measures to improve diversion quantities will be determined. Selected Program #10: Return-to-Source Plastics Drop-off Background As noted in the.Introduction, the Board of Supervisors declared its intent to require diversion of PET, clear and colored HDPE, and expanded polystyrene from disposal in the new landfills. t Contra Cosa County 5- 70 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component ' Low density polyethylene (LDPE) and linear low density Pof eth lene (LLDPE) are identified by the Society of Plastics Industries with the number 4; these materials are used to manufacture plastic film for grocery, drug and department store bags, dry cleaning bags, pallet wrap, and lawn/leaf bags. LDPE, in rigid form, is used to manufacture plastic bottle caps, margarine tub lids, and dish washing detergent bottles. Re-use of the plastic film faces some problems. First, it is difficult to find markets for the plastic. Second, current prices are around $.01 (one cent) per pound ($20 per ton) when the markets are buying. Third, many of the bags are not labelled with the identifying plastic resin symbol or number. Fourth, because consumers cannot distinguish between the different types of plastic, LDPE is often contaminated when consumers return HDPE bags. SSeveral grocery store and drug store chains have established programs to recycle LDPE, LDPE, and HDPE plastic bags and pallet wrap. Customers may return their used plastic bags to participating stores and place them in recycling containers. Pallet wrap is collected from shipments. The collected plastics are then returned by each store to the .central warehouse where it is baled for marketing. Additionally, some stores are now limiting or reducing the use of plastics by re- introducing paper.bags, selling reusable cloth bags, or encouraging customers to reuse bags they already have. While the large grocery and drug store chains have company policies and central warehouses for collecting and baling plastics, dry cleaners are largely independent operations. However, the dry cleaning industry is also beginning to address the need for plastics recycling. 1. Program Description Return of LDPE bags by consumers to local stores is clearly convenient for participants. This LDPE return-to-source collection program will expand already existing collection programs and is more easily implemented than attempting to develop a different collection system. Stores will be encouraged to have visible and accessible collection bins. Assistance will be made available to stores in providing information on plastic recycling. Additionally, information on stores participating in the LDPE bag return-to-source program will be made available to the. public. To assure that these collection programs continue and can be expanded requires them to remain economically viable. To be economically viable, the collected materials must be relatively free. of contamination, including free of other,plastic types. Public education about the various types of plastics and action by the State to encourage the use of only one resin type in specified products, such as grocery bags, is important in reducing contamination. 2. Materials Targeted and Capture Rates LDPE accounts for 3.7% of the residential wastestream and 2.7% of the total unincorporated wastestream. . Capture rates can be expected to be moderate to high due to the convenience of the return-to-source system. Consumers should use the program based on environmental concerns and to reduce their own household waste stream, particularly if variable can rates are in effect. Overall capture rates might total 10% short term, and 20% medium term, for LDPE from the residential wastestream. April 1993 51- 71 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component 3. Costs Ongoing staffing needs for working with stores, monitoring, and evaluating the program will be approximately .2 FTE, or $9,600 annually. Private sector costs are unknown in that they will fully handle the program. 4. Methods for Handling and Disposal No special residue problems will result. 5. End-uses Reprocessing into bags with post-consumer content. 6. Necessary Facilities No new facilities will be required. 7. Monitoring Stores will be requested to provide either quarterly or semi-annual reports on the tonnages. 8. Monitoring and Evaluation The County's role in monitoring and evaluation will require approximately .1 FTE. 9. Remedial Measures If the program fails to achieve projected diversion or if obtaining information is difficult, the County will explore alternative methods for collection and reporting. a Selected Program # 11 Recycling Market Development Zone Background n As of the writingof the final draft of this document in April 1993 the Count along in cooperation —" P � Y� g P with all of the jurisdictions along the county's shoreline, has applied for and been granted a O Recycling Market Development Zone. Costs to implement the program are estimated to be $100,000 annually. For details on this program, see Appendix D. Contra Costa County 5- 72 April 1993 Final Draft 5RRE Recycling Component VIII. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION Table 5-12 Summary of Program Costs i ....... ... art= ....>: .:::.. .:...... ........:.:.:.::.:::.. ...S...rt..Rate... ....�t........ .............Atl _. ......... .......��I✓........... ........:..:R�v�nue:;:�q��c�e..::::::>::»:::<.. Costs........ ....Re uxred.... .......... s`•>;:ear `' <' »> >' »> > > ::::.::.::......:::.:..:::.:........ .... ........................................................ ................:.:..::.................. .......................................... �9.t.......... ........................:................................... ........... .... :..:::.:::::::.:....,.:::::::... ......::.. :.:......::::::. .::...:•::::::::::.....:.:::::.........:.::.............:... ...................................................... ...:......... 1. Residential Curbside 1/92 -- $9,600 .2 Curbside Collection Rate/Franchise Fees 2. Multi-Family 1/92 -- $4,800 .1 Same as Residential Curbside. 3. Drop-off Facilities 4/92 $228,000 *$39,200 .4 Sale of Material/ Resource Recovery Fees 4. Buy-Backs 1/93 $316,000 *$202,000 .1 Sale of Material/ -- Resource Recovery Fees 5. Commercial/Industnal Routes 1/92 $12,000 .25 CDD 6. Land-Use Permits 4/94 $8,000 $2,400 .05 CDD 7. Direct Linkages 4/92 $62,000 $30,000 .5 Resource Recovery Fees 8. Source-Separation C&D Debris 1/93 $7,200 $4,800 .1 CDD -- 9. Schools 1/92 $4,800 .1 CDD 10, Return-to-Source 4/92 -- $9,600 2 Resource Recovery Fees 11. Recycling Market Development Zone 3/92 -- $100,000 1.25 Resource Recovery Fees TOTAL $621,450 $437,400 2.20 Annual operating costs will be partially or wholly offset through the sale of materials. April 1993 5- 73 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Cotnponent M O� O� w > W Z r4 0Cq •--, CS en cet a � o a a O. U od d ti Cn A z z •• o E O O M C U 0 > oh �, F" �3 S E o > U W rA en en C7 B W O d a. 09 a W" O G W y 0 p LJM UA Uw aa V a0, O 0, ° ccv a ' 4) c o y V U .CC W v� U U U ri U UU U a on �a � •� a � W � a;14 0 cqd °u w o f� a s ' U Q Fav •° a x a oCr,.3a o O w •b Q ... aUi coa O 3 aai U a 03 a� a °~' c A = o-ZI a yto M - e to w, y A C N V M 1 a oOiu w �, 'v 4 * °? JS( o �j •v w o 'a 6'Uo•o � o > > aUU zd �. w, dEwc� h w0'� wCa oOU Oa, H .E a v) a U w a • • • a a Contra Costa County 5- 74 April 1993 ' Final Draft SRRE Recycling Component ' I? aM• � ' ) ON 'o 00 rn i 4 a 0 h y N h y h VJ h y H M N N C4 �O M w- 0 a w a o � A a z rA A A A A A A A O A A A U cc U U U U U U U " U U V U W ' a eto 0 03 PO o U W „z~„1 U a � � o W a a rn a� •v .� � ..7 i � SC v, 4 >' w W .oc ae U W A U w ti U S. CC O wa° OCc,) a oa . O OO CIL,a �s ao Cu 01 April 1993 5- 75 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Recycling Component 1 1 1 � wWosrnvc conWorrEnrr 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS < PAGE INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . 1 SECTION I. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A. Goals . . . . . . . . . . : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 B. Objectives . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF SELECTED PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. Short-Term Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Medium-Term Programs . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 SECTION III: EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 SECTION IV. ,MATERIALS SELECTION . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . > . . . . 6 SECTION V: EVALUATION OF PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 B. Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 C. Evaluation of Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 SECTION VI: PROGRAMS SELECTED . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 A. . Outline of Selected Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 17 B. General Design Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 C. Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 D. Anticipated'End-Uses for Diverted Materials , . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 E. Obstacles to Marketing 29 SECTION VII: MONITORING AND EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 SECTION VIII: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 i i LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 6-1: Compostable Materials in Waste Stream, by Volume and Weight . . . . . . . , . . . 7 Table 6-2: Comparison of Elements of Six Alternatives Evaluated . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 15 Table 6-3: Evaluation of Composting Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 6-4: 1995 Projected Wastestream Diversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 6-5: Year 2000 Projected Wastestream Diversion . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 6-6: Yard Waste Products and Quality Variations 29 Table 6-7: Composting Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 i� it COMPOSTING COMPONENT INTRODUCTION i Developing composting programs will play an important role for Contra Costa County in meeting the diversion mandates of the California Integrated Waste Management Act. The recovery of organic wastes for composting represents both an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity is to divert a significant percentage of the waste stream from landfills back into productive use, returning nutrients and organic matter back to the soil. The challenge is to overcome siting and financial constraints to move the management of organic wastes from theory to implementation. From public education efforts designed to generate a supply of uncontaminated materials, to the marketing of the finished product, Contra Costa County will need to invest staff time, foster creativity, and solicit community involvement to develop successful programs. The Component describes the County's plan for achieving these goals for the unincorporated areas of the county. It is written in accordance with the Act and the regulations promulgated by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. This Component is organized as follows: Section I: Goals and Objectives Section II: Summary of Selected Programs Section III: Existing Conditions Section IV: Materials Selection Section V: Evaluation of Program Alternatives Section VI Programs Selected Section VII: Monitoring and Evaluation Section VIII: Program Implementation The regulations promulgated by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)define composting as the controlled biological decomposition of organic wastes. Other recovered materials derived from processing, but not active composting, such as wood chips used as mulch or wood fines, count toward meeting the required diversion goals. These materials are addressed in the Recycling Component. Similarly, CIWMB regulations require that programs promoting backyard composting of yard waste by homeowners be addressed in the Source Reduction Component. Other methods of source reduction at the household level, such as leaving grass clippings on lawns, using raw yard waste (grass clippings and chipped brush) as mulch, and planting drought-resistant April 1993 6- 1 C6ntra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component vegetation (known as xeriscaping) are also addressed in the Source Reduction Component. It should be recognized, however, that all of these programs are interrelated, and should be considered as elements of an overall approach to managing organic wastes. I. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES A. Goals e Contra Costa County's composting program goals for the unincorporated areas are to: 1. Achieve the highest feasible recovery rate, through the development and institution of a variety of programs; 2. Design composting programs that directly and explicitly involve waste generators, and that serve the broader development needs of the community; 3. Foster private sector involvement in creating and operating compost programs; 4. Ensure that compost products are of the highest standards of consistency and quality;and 5. Stimulate and stabilize the market demand for compost products. B. Objectives Objectives include the targeted numerical diversion rate for the short-term and medium-term planning periods, and short-term and medium-term market development objectives. 1. Quantitative Diversion Objectives: The quantitative goals of the composting component are to achieve a short-term composting rate of 6%, and a medium-term composting rate of 19%. 2. Qualitative Market Development Objectives: The short and medium-term market development objectives are as follows: ShortTerm: a. Assist compost operators in securing and increasing markets for a variety of products derived from size reduction and composting of organic wastes, including wood chips, shredded mulch, uncomposted fines, and finished compost. b. Encourage residential, commercial, and agricultural use of compost products through public awareness campaigns ("buy organic"). Contra Costa Co4nty 6- 2 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component Medium-Term: c. Establish the Shoreline Recycling Market Development Program, in accordance with the proposal approved by the CIWMB. d. Identify and develop new markets for compost products that currently have weak or non- existent markets. SECTION II: SUMMARY OF SELECTED PROGRAMS This section summarizes programs selected for implementation in this component. The short-term and medium-term planning periods which are referenced refer to January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1994 (short-term), and January 1, 1995 to January 1, 2000 (medium-term). A. Short-Term Programs 1. West County Yard Waste Composting Facility Require the establishment of a yard waste recovery program as a condition of approval for a land use permit for the West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. This program should be phased-in during the short-term planning period (1995), and developed to full-scale in the medium-term planning period (1995-2000). 2. Central County Yard Waste Composting Facility Monitor and evaluate the pilot yard waste recovery program at the Acme Fill Transfer Station pursuant to the terms of Land Use Permit 2122-86. This facility will accept yard waste from the unincorporated East County area, in addition to serving the unincorporated Central County area, until a facility in East County is available. 3. East County Yard Waste Composting Facility. Require the establishment of a yard waste recovery program as a condition ofapproval for a solid waste transfer station or mini-transfer station in East County. If the facility is located within an incorporated area, the Board of Supervisors should request a similar provision in the use permit issued by the City with land use jurisdiction. 4. Establish Yard Waste Collection Programs Require waste haulers to establish collection programs for source-separated yard waste from residences and businesses in the unincorporated communities, as well as from institutions. All unincorporated communities should have curbside collection established during the short- term planning period. The establishment of drop-off facilities may be considered to serve areas for which curbside collection is not feasible. April 1993 6- 3 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component l 5. Residential Public Education Program Establish a public education program which provides instruction in backyard composting and , other methods for the source reduction of yard waste as well as the utilization of a centralized composting facility. This program should include compost demonstration areas at solid waste transfer facilities. 6. Commercial Public Education Program Establish a public education program for landscapers, land clearing operators,and multi-family and commercial business managers which encourages on-site or off-site composting and the selection of plants which produce less waste. ' 7. Land Use Permit Review Process Establish a process for the review of landscaping plans during the land use permit and building permit review process to promote the use of,xeriscaping and to provide for on-site or off-site composting. This program should be initiated during the short-term planning period and continued throughout the medium-term period. 8. Composting Programs Assistance Assist County-owned or County-operated facilities and private businesses in establishing composting programs. Encourage on-site composting at public parks. This program should be initiated during the short-term planning period and continued throughout the medium-term planning period. R re 9. ate Structure Review. . Review the rate structure for refuse collection for the unincorporated area and ensure that the structure encourages backyard composting, source separation of compostables and the utilization of composting facilities. This program should be initiated during the short-term planning period; changes to the rate structure should coordinate with collection of source separated yardwaste. 10. Compost Market Development and Public Agency Utilization of Compost In conjunction with the other jurisdictions arrayed along the county's shoreline, develop the Recycling Market Development Zone, as approved by the CIWMB. Review County purchasing specifications to ensure that products of compost operations are utilized to the maximum extent feasible. Encourage other government agencies to utilize compost products. 1.1. Pilot Food Waste Composting . P g Encourage all transfer stations to develop pilot composting programs for food waste as part of their composting operation. The inclusion of food waste should be required during the medium-term planning period. Contra Costa County 6- 4 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component B. Medium-Term Programs 1. Food Waste Collection and Composting . Require the curbside collection of food waste from residences, , from. commercial establishments and institutions, and require the expansion of compost facilities to include processing food waste. 2. Food Waste Public Education Expand the public education program to promote source separation of food waste. 3. Pilot Composting Projects Require all transfer stations to develop pilot composting programs for other organic wastes, such as sewage sludge, mixed waste paper and newspaper. 4. Private Sector Compost Product Development Encourage the private sector to develop new compost products and compost markets. 5. Sewage Sludge Composting Encourage composting of sewage sludge from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) as a waste management method and encourage the use of compost in land restoration projects. SECTION III: EXISTING CONDITIONS This section describes current and planned composting activities and facilities located in or serving the unincorporated area of the County. The only residential composting activity identified which serves the unincorporated areas is the collection and shredding of Christmas trees, resulting in a diversion of approximately one ton per year. There are two composting activities identified for commercial and industrial generators: a tree service operation which transforms tree prunings and tree branches into mulching and landscaping materials and a commercial yard waste composting operation. In 1990,these operations diverted approximately' 1,263 tons per year from disposal. There are other activities which divert organic materials from landfills but which are not considered "composting." For instance, Waste Fibre, Inc. in Antioch processes 40,000 tons per year of yard and wood waste. The chips are sold to cogeneration facilities for use as boiler fuel. This end-use is classified as "transformation" in state law, and cannot count towards diversion mandates in the. short-term planning period. However, under certain conditions, this activity may count for 10% of diversion to achieve the 50% medium-term goal. Waste Fibre has plans to separate the material into chips and fines, and sell the latter without further processing for use in the landscaping industry. According to State law, this would be considered a recycling activity and is addressed in the Recycling Component. April 1993 6-5 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component There are two planned composting facilities for the unincorporated area: an operation at the Acme Fill Transfer Station and an. operation on a closed portion of the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill. Acme Fill Corporation, as required by County LUP 2122-86, started a pilot composting project at their transfer station in 1991. Yard waste from collection and self-haul vehicles are processed in a tub grinder and screened into chips and fines. The chips are sold as mulch and as boiler fuel, and fines are composted for use as a soil amendment or as a feedstock in a potting or topsoil mix. Other materials will also be processed on an experimental basis, including wood waste, food residues, ash and sewage sludge. The project will be developed in approximately 3 stages. In the first phase, approximately 20 tons per day (TPD) of yard and wood waste will be processed, and the fines will be composted on a4-acre portion of the closed landfill. The project will be expanded in the second phase to handle 50 TPD and a composting area of 7.5 acres. In the full-scale third phase, 100 TPD of material will be processed, and the fines composted on 15 acres. The results of the pilot program are intended to shape the permanent facility and its programs based on about one year's experience. Richmond Sanitary Service plans to phase-in a full-scale yard and wood waste recovery program in late 1993. The program will coordinate with the proposed West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility scheduled to open in 1994. At the recovery facility, yard and wood waste delivered by self-haul and collection vehicles will be tipped on the transfer station floor, and moved by a rubber-tired loader to the processing area. Materials will be fed by conveyor into the shredder for, size reduction, then screened into chips and fines. Chips will comprise the majority of the material, and'will be sold as boiler fuel to biomass conversion facilities. The fines will be taken to the closed West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill and composted using an open-air windrow method. a Materials will be formed into windrows, turned regularly, and made into usable compost in four months. Finished compost will be used on-site for landfill cover and erosion control, and sold for other end-uses. The composting project will be phased-in to determine the best operational and system configuration for full-scale implementation. The project at full-scale will compost approximately 12,000 tons of yard and wood waste fines per year. SECTION IV. MATERIALS SELECTION In this section individual waste types and categories will be evaluated and selected as priority targets for composting programs. The CIWMB Planning Guidelines for Integrated Waste Manaizement Plans require the identification of specific waste categories or waste types as priorities for diversion. The Waste Generation Analysis (refer to Waste Characterization Study, page 2-2) found that 9.1% of the wastestream by .weight is yard waste, 6.8% is food waste and 4.6% is wood waste. The volumes of compostable materials are presented in Table 6-1. Contra Costa County 6- 6 April 1993 Final Drag!SUE Composting Component TABLE1•- 6 . COMPOSTABLE MATERIALS IN WASTE STREAM, BY VOLUME AND WEIGHT Waste Category or Type Average Density Waste Generated: Waste Generated: (pounds per Tons Per Year Cubic Yards Per cubic yard) Year Wood Waste 300 29,353 195,687 Yard Waste 350 18,778 107,303 Food,Waste 850 14,104 . 33,186 TOTAL --- 62,235 336,176 Almost all organic materials are candidates for composting. Examples of materials,that can be composted are sewage sludge, animal manure, yard waste, crop residues, paper mill sludge, food wastes, and various food. processing wastes. Characteristics which determine the usefulness and suitability of a material for composting are the organic matter content, nutrient ,composition, structural stability, and moisture content. Based on these four characteristics, there are many components of the solid waste stream.that can be effectively composted. Yard waste '(leaves, grass clippings, and brush) and wood waste (pallets, crates, furniture, roofing material, dimensional lumber, and plywood) are the materials most commonly targeted for diversion. To select the waste categories which are priorities for diversion, the following criteria were used: 1. Weight: tha weight of the waste type, as expressed as'a percentage of the total weight of the waste stream segment, and of the total waste stream. 2. Volume,• the volume of the waste type, as expressed as a percentage of the total volume of the waste stream segment, and of the total waste stream. 3. Suitability for Composting: whether the waste type can be composted, as determined by the organic matter content, nutrient composition, structural stability and moisture content. Based on these criteria and waste food waste and wood. waste have been selected as priorities for , y w P . diversion. Yard wastes comprise 9.2% of the total wastestream and 17.3% of the disposed residential waste.. Currently, 18,778 tons of yard waste are generated annually within the unincorporated areas 'of the County. Food wastes comprise 6.9% of the wastestream, which translates to approximately 14,104 tons of food waste generated during 1990s.. Wood waste comprises 14.3% of the total waste stream and 10.8% of the disposed industrial wastes. Currently, 29,354 tons of wood wastes are generated within the unincorporated areas of the County.' Although ' This data includes wood waste used for transformation. The amount of wood waste transformed is 18,576 tons per year. April 1993 6- 7 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component sewage sludge, agricultural wastes and mixed solid wastes are not identified as diversion priorities, they are addressed in the program alternatives section below (refer to Section V: Programs Selected). SECTION V: EVALUATION OF PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES This section describes and evaluates program alternatives for collection, processing,and composting. Part A provides .an overview of the various parts of a recovery program. Part B describes six alternatives which differ widely by diversion potential, cost, and end products. Part C evaluates the alternatives according to twelve criteria. A. Introduction: A comprehensive composting program involves many interrelated activities from generation to marketing of the finished material. They are: • Collection • Composting • Materials Handling • Post Processing • Size Reduction • Marketing • Mixing 1. Collection: A complete program for organic waste management must include development of separate collection of materials. The collection of materials is often the largest expense in a comprehensive recovery system. The appropriate mix of drop-off sites and curbside a collection, the type of container used at curbside, and the type of vehicle used for collection are all issues that need to be addressed in designing a collection system. The type of truck used will depend on the types of containers used for curbside collection,processing capabilities at the recovery site, and the existing trucks owned by those performing the collection that could potentially be used for material pickup. 2. Materials handling: Materials handled at the processing center need to be moved several times between arrival on site and departure for markets. A rubber-tired loader is a basic piece of equipment that is essential for loading vehicles and managing unloading areas, feeding materials into size reduction,and screening equipment, and moving materials from one.on-site location to another. Conveyors are also helpful for efficient materials handling, and are used for moving materials from grinding to screening, elevating screened materials to loading bins or vehicles, and creating stockpiles. 3. Size Reduction: Size reduction or mechanicalshredding is used to reduce the volume of the incoming material, create more surface area, and accelerate composting reactions, which decreases the space needed for active composting. Yard, food, and wood waste can be shredded using the same equipment. . 4. Mixing: Mixing assists in bringing materials to the proper moisture level and uniformly distributes the moisture throughout the material. Yard waste is often mixed using a rubber- tired loader. Materials such as food waste and mixed solid waste are usually mixed in a Contra Costa County 6-8 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component rotating drum or-a container with a moisturizing agent to achieve the optimum moisture content. The materials are then taken to the active composting area. 5. Composting: At the composting site, material is managed for proper composting, controlling moisture levels and oxygen availability. Composting is done using one of several unit processes which range in their cost and degree of sophistication. In the common windrow method, materials can be piled to various heights and widths (typically 12 feet high and 25 feet wide) in rows of virtually any length. The material is then turned periodically until the material becomes compost. In most yard debris composting projects, a front-end.loader is used for turning the windrows. An increasing number of projects, however, are using specially designed tractors (referred to as compost turners) to perform the mixing function. 6. Post-Processing: Post-processing is the final phase of a composting system and is designed for the intended compost market. If this step is incorporated, the material can be screened to remove rocks,plastic, and other debris. 'A separate shredding process can also be added prior to the screening to:further refine the material. 7. Marketing: End-users for compost products include landscapers, nurseries, golf, courses, residential gardening, governmental agencies, and agriculture. The end-users for wood chips include industrial plants (biomass conversion facilities) that use woody wastes for fuel in their boilers, landscapers and sewage sludge composting. The materials targeted, and the processing and composting methods selected, will largely determine the range of potential end-uses. r • B. Program Alternatives: This sectiondescribes five alternatives which range from a low-cost, low technology system to amore capital intensive,high technology system. These options were selected because they provide a range of options for material inputs, collection; processing and composting. There are substantial differences between the options in terms of relative costs, quantity of material diverted, etc. All of the programs have been implemented in other jurisdictions around the country, and have been selected for evaluation on the basis of their feasibility and proven track record. The five alternatives are: 1. Drop-off of.grass and leaves, no shredding, composting using a low technology windrow process. Grass and leaves from residential, commercial, and industrial generators are collected at drop-off centers and at transfer stations. The materials are taken to a centralized facility and composted using a simple windrow process. No size reduction is necessary as grass and leaves break down relatively quickly. The windrows are turned periodically using a rubber- tired loader, and finished material is produced in 6-8 months. The main advantages of this alternative are low capital and operating costs. For a 100 ton per day (TPD) facility, approximate capital costs range from $105,000 to $295,000. This excludes the cost of land purchase or lease. Refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates. • i April 1993 6- 9 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component 2. Drop-off of yard debris, size reduction, and composting using a low technology windrow process. Grass, leaves, and brush from residential, commercial, and industrial generators are collected at drop-off centers and transfer stations. The materials are taken to a centralized facility, shredded, and composted using a simple windrow process: The windrows are turned at regular intervals using a rubber-tired loader. Finished material is produced in 6-8 months. An optional step is screening the material into fines and chips, and composting only the fines. This reduces the time and land required for composting. This alternative would divert a substantially larger volume.of material than Alternative #1, given that brush comprises approximately 60% of all yard waste by weight. The capital costs are higher, ranging from $355,000 to $880,000 for a 100 TPD facility (refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates). 3. Curbside residential collection and residential/commercial drop-off of yard debris, size reduction, and composting using a high technology windrow process. This approach has been selected by Richmond Sanitary Service and Acme Fill Corporation for their planned recovery programs. Leaves, grass, and brush are collected curbside and delivered to the recovery site by private hauler, landscape contractors, and/or the public. In this high technology approach, additional steps are added to the process described in Alternative #2. The compostable materials are first shredded and screened to remove gross impurities (cans, glass, plastic, etc.). Windrows, approximately 7 feet high by 18 feet wide are formed and moisture is added. With frequent turning by windrow turning machines, a composting may be completed within 3-4 months. Though these machines are more efficient than front-end loaders, and attain greater volume reductions, the capital costs are higher than for lower level technologies. Following the completion of the composting process, screening is performed to remove additional foreign objects. A final grinding may be employed to achieve a fine soil-like texture. The finished material is of much higher quality than that produced in the low technology alternatives, and is able to meet the specifications of a wide variety of end-users. . The main advantages of this alternative are the high diversion levels, efficient processing of materials, and flexibility in marketing the end product. Capital costs for this system would range between $515,000 and $1,125,000 for a 100 TPD facility (assuming the use of bags). Refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates. 4. Curbside residential and commercial collection of food waste and curbside collection of residential yard waste, size reduction, mixing, composting using a high technology windrow process. Wet/dry recycling systems are based on a new approach of separating and categorizing waste at the source. Waste generators separate wastes into wet and dry categories, and place them in two separate containers for collection. The "dry" fraction is mainly refuse such as.paper, plastics, bottles, and cans. The "wet" fraction is normally food waste, yard wastes,,and other organic material. The wet (or organic) material is then processed in one section of a central plant to produce a compost relatively free of contaminants such as glass, plastic, and heavy Contra Costa County. 6- 10 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component l } metals. The dry waste is handled separately at the other section of the processing facility and a substantial amount of glass, paper, plastics, cardboard, ferrous and non-ferrous metals can be recovered. The capital costs of this alternative would range from $610,000 to $1,225,000 for a 100 TPD facility (assuming the use of bags). Refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates. 5. In-vessel composting of mixed solid waste. In-vessel composting/processing generally means the partial decomposition of organic material within an enclosed vessel. The design of this type of system is dependent upon a short retention time (less than 3 days) for the materials within 'the vessel. Since aerobic decomposition typically takes 8-12 weeks to occur, a very.large vessel would be required to completely decompose the material. Capital costs for such a vessel would be prohibitive. Given that no in-vessel system is currently capable of achieving total decomposition of wastes within a vessel, further treatment in a static pile or windrow system would be needed. In-vessel composting systems are most commonly and successfully used in Europe. There are ten in-vessel systems operating in this country, and many others are in the planning stage. The objective of in-vessel systems are to provide the best environmental conditions, particularly aeration, temperature and moisture. Almost all in-vessel systems use forced aeration in combination with tumbling and/or stirring. • In most versions, the in-vessel system incorporates a rotating drum, which is a long,slightly inclined cylinder. The drum rotates at a slow speed, one-half to eight rotations per minute. Retention in the drum varies from eight hours to five days, and the waste must be further composted over an additional period. In-vessel composting vendors generally include a Mwindrow pile or windrow system for further maturation after retention in the rotating drum. Capital costs for a 100 TPD facility would range from $4,000,000 to $15,000,000. Refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates. 6. Aerated static pile co-composting of sewage sludge and mixed solid waste. Mixed Solid Waste (MSW) is collected and delivered to a facility, then shredded and mixed with sewage sludge. The mixture is then composted using an aerated static pile method. After active composting, the material would be screened and cured for 30 days before being marketed. . The composting system is very simple and utilizes off-the-shelf equipment. Solid waste is fed into a hopper which feeds onto a horizontal sorting conveyor, and from there to an elevating conveyor into the shredder. Another conveyor takes it from.the shredder to the mixer. Garbage bags are opened before shredding, primarily for inspection. Many of the non- compostable items are hand sorted;and removed to,a landfill. These include clothing, hard plastics, leather and rubber, glass, etc. MSW is put through a slow speed shredder twice to reduce particle size, then put in a batch-operated mixer with horizontal augers. When the mixer.hopper is full, its contents are weighed by a tension scale. An inoculum made of medium screenings from a.previous compost pile is added to the solid waste. Digested or April 1993 6-11 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component h a .dewatered sludge is added asa liquid source to the solid waste-inoculum mix to achieve a 50% moisture. The materials are mixed, ejected from the mixer, and placed in piles. Windrows are formed at the beginning of the composting process and are not turned until the composting process is completed. A forced air system, which uses a positive or negative air flow under the compost windrow, controls the temperature and air flow within the windrow. Processed waste is formed into piles or windrows on a composting pad. The material is allowed to decompose over a given period of time without turning. Capital costs for a 100 TPD facility would range from $3,000,000 to $12,000,000. Refer to Appendix C2 for detailed cost estimates. C. Evaluation of Program Alternatives This section is the evaluation of the six alternatives which could be used to achieve the composting goals and objectives specified in Section I of this component. Each of the six program alternatives has been evaluated according to the following criteria: 1. Waste diversion potential: The effectiveness of the program to reduce the volume and weight of material. Weighting is according to the overall percentage of the waste stream that a program can be expected to divert. Low: Less than 5% of total waste stream diverted Medium: 5 10% of total waste stream diverted High: . More than 10% of total waste stream diverted 2. Hazards created by the alternative considered: The degree of hazards posed by implementing the program (air quality, water quality, noise, worker health and safety, etc.). a . Low: The option has environmental impacts or hazards that are severe or unmitigable Medium: The impacts or hazards are mild or mitigable High: Few or no hazards or nuisances exist, and hazards can be adequately contained 3. Adaptability to Change: ry The ability of the program to adapt to changing economic, technical and social conditions (including consumer habits). Low: Program tied to particular technology, market, or social institution, and little adaptability is possible Medium: Program may be hampered by predictable, moderate changes, and some adaptation is possible with significant program alteration High: Program is flexible, and much adaptability is possible a Contra Costa County 6- 12 April 1993 Final Dra,4 SRRE Composting Component 4. Ease of Implementation: The time required to implement program Low: Greater than two years Medium: One to two years High: Less than one year 5. Consistency with Local Policies: The consistency with existing ordinances, local policies and'regulations. Low: Major changes to existing codes and ordinances would,need to be adopted prior to program selection Medium: Minor changes needed High: 'No changes needed 6. Facility Requirements: The need to expand or build new facilities to implement the program Low: Major expansion or new facilities required Medium: Moderate expansion required High: -No significant expansion of existing facilities 7. Institutional Barriers: Implementation may be impacted by existing institutional infrastructures such as waste stream ownership agreements and long term franchise contracts. Institutional barriers must be expected in planning and implementing a new integrated waste management system. Low: Severe institutional barriers Medium: Moderate barriers or moderately difficult to overcome High: Few or easily overcome institutional barriers 8. Capital Cost Effectiveness: The initial costs for items such as equipment, facility, and site preparation. Low: Greater than $3,000,000 Medium: $1,000,000 - $3,000,000 High: Less than $1,000,000 9. Long-term Cost Effectiveness: For the purposes of this criterion, costs'are expressed as the net cost per ton diverted, based on an evaluation of operating and administrative costs, and revenue projections. April 1993 6- 13 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE. Composting Component Low: Greater than $105 per ton Medium: $85 - $105 per ton High: Less than $85 per ton 10. Available End-Uses or Markets: Availability and necessity of end-uses or markets for finished compost. ]� Low: Markets are currently nonexistent or unstable U Medium: Potential for medium-term development of markets. Markets exist but are subject to moderate fluctuations High: Existing and potential markets are available and relatively stable 11. Involvement of Waste Generators: Involvement of people, as waste generators, in managing and reducing their own wastes is a cornerstone of a successful integrated waste management program. A shift in the solid waste management system requires a corresponding shift in habits, attitudes, and individual actions that affect the production of waste materials. Low: Little involvement, or enlistment difficult Medium: Only minority involvement, or limited feasibility High: Majority of producers of a waste stream segment must be involved, and involvement is feasible 12. Operating Experience: The extent to which the program has been successfully implemented and proven effective in other communities. It also considers the extent to which the alternative is undergoing rapid technological change. Low: Limited history or rapidly changing technology Medium: Moderate history or slowly changing technology High: Extensive history or established technology Table 6-2 compares the six alternatives based on their component parts. The evaluation of the alternatives according to the criteria above is summarized in Table 6-3. Contra Costa County 6- 14 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component t� O tJ A a v Id az 30 st `o 0 0 TD N ° ` 3 A gyPik '01 P A o� a 'g .rA a� c o w r � Contra Costa Draft S nt Bina Compon Co 1npostin8 6, 15 Ap'i11993 D 8 5cn 3 ao o c w° -boo 8 . -w 78 tE � � D e4 M V1 U w ]� o u a .n a .� D W _ . DM O bA Q � bA by bA hq by dp -• b11 b1p ..r D cd tw 40- 00 U a to a 3 o ao c 'n ° a s� w Q U a w U D.� tV M 4 U'1 1�6 l--: 00 O� Contra Costa County6- 16 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component t 1 SECTION VI: PROGRAMS SELECTED rThis section describes.the programs selected for collecting, processing, and composting organic wastes. Part A provides an overview of the alternatives, the rationale for their selection and identifies the estimated quantities to be diverted. Part B describes the general design criteria for the alternatives and discusses the variables involved in each element of the system. A description of facility requirements is provided in Part C, and end-uses and obstacles,to marketing are discussed in Parts D and E. A. Outline of Selected Alternatives Alternative #3, targeting yard waste for curbside collection, size reduction, and composting using a windrow method, was selected for the short-term planning period. This.alternative was selected on the basis of its cost-effectiveness, high diversion potential, flexibility, and speed of implementation. The system requires active participation of waste generators, and is adaptable to changes in design and operation. An estimated 6.2% of the total waste stream would be recovered when programs are running at full-scale in the three planning areas of the County, diverting 12,893 tons by 1995 (refer to Table 6-4). This program includes the following components: • Compost facilities in each of the three regions of the County. A drop-off location may be substituted for an East County facility if this method is determined to be more cost effective. • Curbside residential collection of yard debris at a frequency of no less than once every two weeks. • Curbside collection of yard debris generated bybusinessesand institutions where feasible. • Drop locations for yard debris generated by commercial yard maintenance businesses and other businesses and institutions. • Public education which provides instruction in, and encouragement for, backyard composting and other methods. for source reduction of yard debris, as well as the utilization of a centralized composting facility. i • Public education for landscapers, land clearing operators, multi-family development and commercial business managers which encourages on-site or off-site composting and the selection of plants which require less water and produce less waste. • Review of landscaping plans during the land use permit review process to promote the use of xeriscaping and to provide for on-site or off-site composting. • Encouragement of on-site composting at public parks. April 1993 6- 17 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component • Development of Recycling Market Development Zone program. •- Establishment of compost demonstration areas at solid waste transfer facilities. • Assistance for County-owned or County-operated facilities and for businesses to establish composting programs. D • Utilization of composting products by the County to the maximum extent feasible, and the encouragement of other government agencies to utilize compost products. In the medium-term planning period, this program will be expanded to include food waste (Alternative ##4). Alternative #/4 is selected on the basis of its very high diversion potential, greater involvement of waste generators, and available end-markets for high quality compost products. Phasing-in the program will allow careful planning and analysis of the optimal system design, and the development of a strong public education campaign. Full-scale implementation will occur in the medium-term planning period, resulting in the diversion of 13.1% of the total wastestream (28,196 tons diverted in the year 2000) as detailed in Table 6-5. In addition to the program components detailed for Alternative #13 above, this program will also include: • Collection of food waste from residences, commercial food establishments and institutions. a . • Expansion of compost facilities to include the processing of food waste. . a • Public education to promote source separation of food waste. • Pilot composting programs at solid waste transfer stations for other organic wastes such as mixed waste paper and newspaper. • Encouragement of the private sector to develop new compost products. • Encouragement of sewage sludge composting at publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). D Contra Costa County 6- 18 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component a rTable 6-4i 1995 Projected Wastestream Diversion Targeted Diversion % of Material Wastestream Tons Projpcted Projected Projected Available Capture Wastestream Tons in 1995 Rate (%) ` Diversion Diverted (%) Yard Waste 9.1%. 19,426 50% 4.6% 9,713 Wood Waste 4.6% 10,598* 30'% 1.6% 3,179 TOTALS 13.7% 30,024 1 42.9% 6.2% 12,893 (weighted) * Does not include wood waste used in transformation,. . Table 6=5s ' 'Year 2000 Projected Wastestream Diversion Targeted Diversion . � % of Material Wastestream Tons Projected Projected Projected Available Capture Wastestream Tons in,1995 Rate(%) Diversion Diverted (%) Yard Waste .9.1% 20,464 75% 7.2% 15,34 Food Waste 6.8%, 15,206 50% 3.6% 7,603 Wood Waste 4.6% 12,157* 40% 2.3% 4,863 rTOTALS 23.5% 47,827 58.25% 13.1 28,196 (weighted) * Does not include wood waste used in transformation. B. General Design Criteria ' 1.. Short-term: Yard waste An effective yard waste collection system includes many components, all of which must function smoothly together. The physical components include the method used to set yard waste out at the curb (in bags, bins, or loose) and the type of hauling vehicle. Equipment for processing yard waste at the recovery facility must also be planned in conjunction with collection equipment. Factors affecting the selection and use of equipment include the April 1993, 6- 19 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component quantity, composition, and seasonality of yard waste generation, the structure and route allocation of the existing hauling industry, and market specifications for the finished yard waste compost. This section identifies the collection options which are consistent with these variables and summarizes the compost process. There are several collection methods that would be effective in the County(plastic bags,paper bags, designated containers and the use of drop-off sites). The loose collection of yard wastes by vacuum trucks, front-end loaders or a street sweeper is not recommended. The use of this collection system could clog storm sewers, contaminate the compostables with street wastes and oils or could block emergency vehicle rights-of-way. The initial investment for equipment is also much higher than for several other collection options. O a. Plastic Bags The greatest advantage of using plastic bags for yard waste pick-up is the lack of behavior. U change required of residents, as compared to other container options. The greatest disadvantages are the increase in processing equipment necessary to remove as much of the plastic as possible, and the decreased marketability of the finished compost containing plastic fragments, as complete removal of plastic is very unlikely. The only way to avoid debagging equipment at the composting site is to require haulers to debag the yard wastes a as they are picked up at the curb. This is a time-consuming process which results in high collection costs per ton compared to other collection methods. In order to respond to environmental concerns regarding degradability, a number of D manufacturers have produced plastic bags from resins containing starch or other additives. Starch molecules, interspersed along the polymer chains, are digested by microbes, Q thereby breaking the polymers into shorter pieces. Unfortunately, these biodegradable plastic bags do not break down at nearly the same rate as yard wastes. Moreover, the intermediate products resulting from degradable plastic bags containing starch may include compounds which are undesirable in the composting process. The end product of the decomposition, plastic dust, is not well defined and is of unknown toxicity to life forms at the point of compost end-use. b. Paper Bags Biodegradable paper yard waste bags offer several advantages, including: (1) few 8 behavior changes required of residents; (2) no change in hauling equipment required; and (3) a quality finished compost without plastic fragments. The disadvantages of using paper yard waste bags are their tendency to lose strength when wet (breaking open when lifted by haulers), their high cost relative to plastic bags, and the logistics of widely distributing the bags and promoting their use. Although some users of paper yard waste bags have complained that they do not hold together when wet, several manufacturers claim their bags have weathered the test, holding together after a full winter outside. One approach to the cost and distribution problem would be to have bags distributed by haulers with the cost of collection included in the overall price. . e Contra Costa County 6- 20. April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component i . c. Designated Containers Collection in designated containers is relatively easy for residents to carry out and provides yard waste free of plastic, resulting in,a more marketable finished compost. A designated container can be any existing waste bin or can, identified with a sticker, or a designated wheeled container provided to the user.. If specialized containers are provided, they can be designed to be used with a mechanical lifting apparatus on rear-loaders, front- loaders; or side-loaders,' eliminating the need for collection workers to lift.and dump heavy yard waste bins into the truck. The main shortcoming of bins as yard waste set-out containers is their insufficient capacity to accommodate seasonal fluctuations in generation, especially the fall leaf drop from mature trees. Even with some manual compaction, it would be difficult to load more than one good leaf pile into a 30 or 40 gallon bin, let alone many piles of leaves. Additional bags can be used to collect material overflows. . d. Multiple Small Drop-Off.Sites In addition to the curbside collection of residential yard waste, Alternative #3 includes establishing drop locations for commercial yard. waste. This includes yard waste generated by commercial yard maintenance businesses and yard waste generated from other businesses. and institutions. The primary disadvantages of drop sites are the difficulties and lead time required for siting and the lack of quality control regarding oversized brush, plastic bag contamination and mixed waste dumping. Nevertheless, significant quantities of yard waste can be recovered through the use of drop sites. In order to minimize the drawbacks associated with dropsites, one drop site will be P established-in each of the three regions of the County. A fourth drop site may be ' established in south-central County. The permanent location for these.drop sites will be at solid waste transfer facilities. Temporary drop sites should be located to serve those regions of the County which do not have a transfer facility by 1993. Once the material has reached the processing site it must be prepared for the composting process. Because yard waste is a relatively homogeneous material, the pre-processing steps are fewer and less complicated than those required,for materials such as mixed waste. The unit processes performed to prepare yard waste _for composting are: bag breaking; size reduction (grinding or shredding);and mixing. The material may also be ' screened to remove contaminants but this operation is most.often done after the material has been composted. - Bag Breaking: Bag breaking is only necessary if the facility accepts waste in plastic non- biodegradable bags. However, it may be considered.a desirable step even if the bags are biodegradable, since opening the bags will speed the decomposition process. Accepting bags of any type also increases the need to screen the finished compost. .Non- biodegradable bags will need to be screened out of the finished compost in order to produce an acceptable product for the end markets. Biodegradable bags may also need 1 to be screened out of the finished compost, as it takes up to 18 months for them to April 1993 6- 21 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component biodegrade. An example of this is a composting process which takes less than 19 months to produce a finished compost. The large pieces of the biodegradable bags that remain in the finished compost would need to be screened out. The rejects from the screening a process could be landfilled or mixed with incoming waste until they are totally decomposed. Equipment capable of breaking open bags is available and often used with a trommel screen that separates the waste into compostables and rejects. The bags can also be broken open by hand; however, a great deal of labor and time is required. Size Reduction: Not.all of the materials received at a yard waste compost facility need' to be ground or chipped. Most leaves need not be ground, however large leaves such as a palm fronds will decompose at a faster rate if they are size reduced. Grass clippings need not be ground since they are already small in size. Wood waste and brush should be ground or chipped before mixing with leaves and grass clippings. Wood waste and brush have a slow decomposition rate, and grinding or chipping will increase the surface area available to microbial attack, thereby increasing the rate of decomposition. Furthermore, once these materials have been ground or chipped, they can also be used separately as a mulch or boiler fuel, and not mixed with leaves and grass clippings. There is a wide array of equipment used to size reduce wood waste, brush and leaves. Commonly used equipment includes tub grinders and chippers. The type of equipment selected will depend upon the amount and size of material accepted at the facility. Mixing: Mixing is the final step in processing before the material is formed into -g g P P g windrows. This is a necessary step in all composting processes because materials which are low in moisture, such as leaves, wood waste, and brush should be combined with materials which are high in moisture, such as grass clippings. It also provides an opportunity to add additional moisture if necessary, and materials whose chemical composition will enhance the composting process. An example of this is mixing grass clippings with leaves and chipped wood waste/brush. Grass has a low carbon content and high nitrogen content whereas leaves, chipped wood and brush have a high carbon content and a low nitrogen content. Together they provide a nutrient balance which promotes a complete decomposition. Composting In a windrow composting system, processed waste is formed into piles or windrows and allowed to decompose over a given period of time. Decomposition of the material is promoted through frequent turning with a compost turning machine or front-end loader. The turning provides oxygen, moisture and some control of the temperature within the windrows. In a windrow composting system the'windrows are formed at the beginning of the composting phase. Temperature, moisture and oxygen within the windrow are monitored and the windrows are turned as needed to optimize the composting process. Contra Costa County 6- 22 Aril 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component 2. Medium-term: Yard and Food Waste As stated in Section A, Alternative #4 has been selected for the medium-term planning period. Alternative #4 involves adding food waste to the existing program.. Fifty percent of the food waste generated will be targeted.. As noted in Table 6-5, the target diversion rates-for yard and wood waste are increased to 75% and 40%, respectively, in the medium-term planning period. This increase results from the expectation that both Alternative #3 and Alternative #4 will be fully implemented in the unincorporated area during the medium-term planning period (1995 -2000). This section describes the main elements of Alternative #4 (a "wet/dry" recycling system) as implemented in other communities and summarizes the collection and ' processing systems. Wet/dry recycling systems are based on a new approach to separating and categorizing waste at the source, and reducing the number of trucks required to collect materials. Waste generators separate wastes into two fractions, wet and dry, and place them.in two separate containers for collection. The "dry" fraction is mainly recyclables such as paper, plastics, bottles.and cans. The "wet" fraction is normally food waste; yard wastes, and other organic material. The wet.(or organic) material is then processed in one section of a central facility to produce a compost relatively free of contaminants such as glass, plastic, and heavy metals. The dry waste is handled separately at another section of the processing facility (or at another location) and a substantial amount of glass,paper,plastics, cardboard, ferrous and non-ferrous metals can be recovered: Though limited, experience with the integrated wet/dry 2-bin approach in Europe is proving that the system is effective both in terms of waste diversion and cost. The approach has also been implemented in several communities in North America, including: New York City; Swift County,Minnesota;Ryley,Alberta;Barrington Village, Illinois; and Pitkin County,Colorado. In existing programs in Amersfoort, The Netherlands, the wet and dry fractions are collected simultaneously. Sixty (60) gallon vertically, divided containers are placed at the curb, and dumped into a truck similarly divided. At the processing site the truck tips into a divided processing system. Education campaigns include instruction for personnel involved via reports and conferences; letters, leaflets, calendars,etc. to households; and educational programs and exhibits for schools. In May, 1990, Swift County, Minnesota began a full-scale food and yard waste recovery program serving the entire commercial sector and 10,000 households. The compostable fraction is estimated to be 45-50% of the waste stream in these sectors. Recyclables are ' separately collected in rear-loading packer trucks and taken to a separate processing facility where they are manually sorted on conveyors and prepared for market. Collection of the remaining compostables and garbage is performed once per week with a dual bag system. Residential generators place their compostable waste and non-processable waste in bags of different color. At the processing facility, the bags are manually sorted on the tipping floor; compostables are fed into the processing system on a conveyor, while the non-processable waste is transferred to the landfill. All compostable material is size reduced and composted using the aerated windrow method in a fully enclosed facility. The finished compost is used on county agricultural land and marketed to farmers and landscapers. April 1993 6- 23 Contra Costa County Final Dra,fl SRRE ' Composting Component New York City started separate residential collection of the wet fraction of the waste stream in 1991 with a 3,000 household pilot program in Brooklyn, and has expanded the service to. 7,500 households. All food waste, yard waste, and food contaminated paper are targeted. Households are provided with either S or 17 gallon buckets with lids, equipped with cellophane lined kraft bags. Materials are delivered to a compost facility located-at a landfill, where they are size reduced and composted in windrows using front-end loaders and a compost turner. Collection:. This program would involve the separate collection of the wet,putrescible fraction of the wastestream, including yard waste, food waste, and food contaminated paper. Container options include paper, plastic, or bio-degradable plastic bags, and wheeled �. containers. Several factors must be considered when determining the container system for wet waste collection, both for inside and outside storage, including the type of waste collected, a convenience, odor, animal/child proof, frequency of collection and collection vehicles. A wide variety of.collection vehicles and schedules are being employed in the United States and Europe to collect wet and dry waste. The most common vehicle is a semi-automated p compactor truck, with a rear-loading bin lifting device for increased capacity without jeopardizing the quality of the materials. Recently, two different dual compartment vehicles 0 have been developed. One system complements a wheeled container with dividing walls to enable both wet and dry materials to be stored in one bin at the curb. Several considerations ' should be taken into account when selecting a collection vehicle including: a • Type and size of container at the curb or apartment building • Frequency of collection D • Safety • Integration with existing vehicles -- retrofit or new • Cost effectiveness • Reliability Since this program will not be implemented until after 1995, a recommendation for a Q collection system has not been included. Technology is advancing very quickly in this area and evaluation is deferred to the medium-term planning period so that the selection will be . based on the most recent technology and program experience. Wet Waste Processin • A typical wet waste processing facility consists of the following components: a • Weight scale • Tipping floor • Plastic bag breaker • Feed conveyor. • Mechanical separation processes • Magnetic separation • Composting facilities • Compost storage. Contra Costa County 6- 24 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component A typical composting process is described here. Wet waste Is deposited on the tipping floor, which is sized to store up to three days of material, and is pushed by a rubber-tired loader onto a feed conveyor. If plastic bags are permitted as containers for the wet waste, the material is conveyed into a bag breaker-. The bag breaker opens the bags through a shearing process and mixes the organics. The conveyor discharges into a screening process where the wet waste is mixed and contaminants such as plastic film, plastic containers, wet paper, diapers and inerts are removed from the organics. These rejects typically represent between . 10% and 20% of the organic fraction depending upon the particular community. The organics are then conveyed through a magnetic separation process which removes any ferrous metals. The'resulting organic material is the feed material for the composting process. Typically the composting process is carried out in an enclosed facility.to control odor and to avoid the effects of precipitation. Composting with a windrow system typically takes up to 20 weeks. The composition of the organic waste stream also affects processing time. Leaves collected in the fall require a significantly longer time to compost. While-the addition of nitrogen will accelerate this process, mixing leaves with other organics can affect the time of composting. A compost processing system which has the flexibility to compost various organic components of the waste stream at varying rates would offer the most effective method of handling the variability of materials. The importance of end product quality cannot be understated, since this issue directly affects market availabilityand pricing. The quality.of the finished compost depends to a great extent on the type and nature of material source separated, and on the processing plant's capability to extract contaminants. In determining the type of wet waste to be placed in the wet bin, a variety of different pilot projects, utilizing different categories of wet waste should be undertaken to determine the quality of the compost. 3. Medium Term:. Additional Program.Considerations Sewage Sludge , Following primary and secondary treatment, approximately 27,500 tons of sewage sludge is generated per year within the County. Following treatment, most sewage sludge in the County is either landfilled or hauled to a distant site for land application. Composting sludge may be a cost-effective alternative to these increasingly expensive management options. One benefit of composting is its ability to further stabilize sludge and increase the range of potential end products. iThere has been a large increase in the number of sewage'sludge projects across the country that are using or plan to use yard waste as a bulking agent in their composting operations. This is attributable in part to decreased landfill 'availability, and in part to local and state legislation that mandates yard waste recovery programs. The increasing number of yard waste projects contributes to the interest in sewage sludge composting, since the two materials can be combined in one composting project, reducing,overall costs and land requirements. Depending on costs and other factors associated with current sludge management approaches, the composting of sewage sludge should be promoted. As indicated above, it is usually April 1993 6- 25 Contra Costa County ' Final Draft SRRE Composting Component necessary to use a bulking agent in sludge composting. Wood chips produced from yard waste are a potential source of material. Regulatory constraints and costs are major considerations. a As with all sludge reuse or recycling options, special attention must be given to potential contaminants. Agricultural Wastes Agricultural wastes are the non-marketable portion of farm production, including manures, Q prunings, and various residues from field and vegetable crops. Manure from feedlots, dairies and stables have readily available markets as soil conditioners and fertilizers, and as such do not present a disposal problem. Most residues from prunings and vegetable and fruit crops a in Contra Costa County are reincorporated directly into the soil, or burned in the field. Field crop residues from barley, wheat, oats and rye are normally burned in the field. Although agricultural wastes are generally not disposed of at sanitary landfills, they should be considered as part of a composting program for two reasons: the importance of returning organic matter to the soil, and the possibility of air quality restrictions on agricultural burning being imposed by the State Air Resources Board. a Crop residues contaminated with pesticides or other toxic organics can be satisfactorily and safely treated by on-site composting. The reason is that toxic concentrations on crop residues a usually are relatively low, and the contaminants generally have a short "half-life" because of the destructive effect of many physical conditions (e.g., high temperatures and the pH variation)that develop during composting. Nevertheless, all incoming material as well as the working environment should be carefully monitored and controlled. C. Facility Requirements D Contra Costa County will be targeting 13,624 tons of yard waste from the unincorporated areas for composting by 1995. By the year 2000, the County expects to divert a total of 28,196 tons of yard waste, food waste and wood waste to composting facilities that would have normally been disposed at landfills. These diversion targets require the establishment of additional composting facilities. Acme Fill Corporation has established a large composting Q demonstration project in the unincorporated Central County area, and Richmond Sanitary Service is planning a composting operation as part of the proposed West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. Acme Fill's composting project started at a processing level of 25 tons per day.. This throughput is expected to increase to 100 tons per day in the next few years. A proposal for a permanent composting operation will be submitted after sufficient operational experience has been obtained in the pilot program. The permanent facility could handle a throughput of 300 tons per day. a Richmond Sanitary Service plans to implement a yard and wood waste recovery program as part of their proposed West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. The composting facility, which is expected to begin operations in 1993, is projected to have an initial capacity of 12,000 tons per year (33 tons per day). The permanent facility will be designed to handle a minimum throughput of 300 tons per day. Contra Costa County 6- 26 April 1993 Final Drat SRRE Composting Component In addition to these projects, there are two existing composting businesses in or near the county for commercial and industrial generators. In 1990, these two operations diverted approximately 1,263 tons per year from disposal. The combination of the existing private operations (assuming 1990 activity levels), the Acme Fill and Richmond Sanitary projects results in a composting capacity of 136 tons per day (49,640 tons per year). Meeting the diversion targets for the unincorporated area will require a capacity of 37 tons per day by 1995 and 77 tons per day by the year 2000. The existing and proposed projects have sufficient capacity to handle these targets. They may not, however, have the capacity to handle the materials diverted from the incorporated areas of the county. Planning for the expansion of the, existing facilities or the establishment of a third facility (associated with an East County transfer facility) should be evaluated. The County should also be prepared to evaluate other proposals for composting facilities offered in addition to those detailed above. Other facilities may target a particular geographical area or segment of the waste stream, and could be useful in decentralizing facility requirements for composting. D. Anticipated End-Uses for'Diverted Materials This section describes the various products of an organic waste recovery program and end-uses and markets for materials. Yard products are considered primarily in this section. Food waste composts are generally very high in quality, and meet or exceed most specifications for yard waste composts. The feasibility of any program designed to recover resources from urban wastes is largely dependent upon the role of marketing. In the case of compost products, securing a market accomplishes the dual objectives of finding an end-use for the finished material and reducing ' the quantity of waste that needs to be landfilled. In addition, securing markets for yard waste products results in revenue from the sale of the.finished material; revenue defrays the cost of processing and thus contributes to the financial viability of recovery programs. ' Several different products can result from the processing of yard waste materials. The most logical products for a given community depends on many variables including characteristics of the yard waste; the degree to which the different components are or can be separated, facility size and processing capabilities, local market conditions, and overall program goals and objectives. The most common products that may result from yard waste processing within the County are: a. COMPOST. Compost is produced as a result of biological decomposition of organic materials. Leaves and grass clippings are good compost feedstock materials in that they decompose fairly quickly. "Woody" materials are very slow to decompose and will remain largely intact through the process. They are, however, sometimes beneficial in the compost process; they serve as a bulking agent which allows for better aeration. The presence of undecomposed wood in finished compost is unacceptable to some users and removal by screening may be necessary. April 1993 6-27 Contra.Costa County ' Fina!Draft SRRE Composting Component a Markets for yard waste compost can be developed provided the quality is suitable. Aesthetic appeal is at least as important as physical and chemical properties. Market development activities should be an important component of a compost program. Revenue should not be expected during the initial years of production. Once markets have been developed and product awareness has improved, it should be possible to price compost similar to a good quality topsoil. b. BOILER FUEL. Boiler fuel can be produced from essentially any brushy/woody yard Q waste through size reduction. However, materials handled as such cannot presently be credited toward diversion goals. c. MULCH. Mulch (also known as landscape chips) is applied to the surface of the soil, most often around the base of plants,to conserve moisture, suppress weeds, moderate soil temperature, or reduce erosion. A two inch layer of mulch can cut water loss due to evaporation from soil by as much as 50% by mitigating the direct exposure of moist a ground to the sun and air. Size reduction of larger woody materials, particularly when done with a chipper, results in an acceptable mulch. Size reduction of smaller brushy materials yields a less desirable product that is considered unacceptable by many users. Experience in various communities has shown that markets are relatively easy to develop if the quality of the chips is good. d. BULKING AGENT FOR SLUDGE COMPOSTING: Bulking agents are required in sludge composting to improve porosity, to provide structural support, and to keep the compost mass from becoming anaerobic. Wood chips and sawdust are the most common bulking agents used in the process. When sludge is composed with size-reduced yard waste or other organic materials, the process is called co-composting. Co-compost may be more desirable from various mixtures of sludge and yard waste. Well-made co-compost is an attractive and versatile product. Co-compost mixtures may be used directly or mixed with nutrients and/or bulking agents to produce a wide variety of soil amendments and mulches. The co-compost can be screened to make products with a textures ranging from a rich, fine,,soil-like material to a coarse mulch of 1-2 inch wood chips. e. SIZE REDUCED YARD WASTE. This material is produced by size reducing mixed yard waste (as compared to landscape chips which are produced from larger, segregated woody materials). Some states have programs which include application of uncomposted yard waste to agricultural lands. Other states are testing the feasibility of using this material as daily cover at landfills. Direct uses for this type of material are limited to a situations where appearance and consistency are not critical. Table 6-6 summarizes the range of yard waste products and the appropriate end-uses. Contra Costa County 6- 28 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component Table 6-6,: Yard Waste Products and Quality Variations Product End-Uses ' Uncomposted Fines Soil tilth amendment Composted Fines Soil fertility amendment Feedstock for topsoil blend Feedstock for potting mix Chips Boiler Fuel ' Mulch Bulking agent Size reduced yard waste Landfill cover. Landspreading ME. Obstacles to Marketing The manufacturing of any new product faces obstacles and compost is no exception. Compost is r relatively unknown in many markets and consumer reluctance to commit to a new product must be expected. Based on the quantities and types of materials currently in.use, it'should be possible to ' market compost successfully provided minimum standards are met and there is a strong commitment to promotion during the initial years of production. The obstacles to marketing are cost, contamination, and the reluctance of consumers to change. 1. Costs: Achieving and maintaining the proper purity, appearance, porosity, texture, consistency,and chemical balance of a commercial-quality product requires capital investments ranging from minimal investments for low-technology composting operations, to expensive bagging machinery and equipment costs for high quality product operations. Composting operations should be tailored to revenues available from compost product sales and costs avoided by not landfilling this material. 2. Contamination: Depending on its origin, yard waste compost may be contaminated by lawn chemicals, lead from paint, disease organisms, tree spray chemicals, automobile exhaust pollutants,broken glass,metal, rocks,weed seeds, and other foreign material. Contamination limits potential marketability by diminishing the product's quality or increasing the costs of processing. The utilization of proper monitoring procedures can eliminate or substantially reduce the potential for contamination. Dilution of toxics also occurs in the blending process,when other feedstocks are added to create a finished product. r3. Consumer Reluctance to Change: Another obstacle is the inertia of end-users against changing products. Essentially, when consumers have already found a product that has worked to their satisfaction, absent a sufficient difference in price, they are likely to be reluctant to change. r April 1993 6- 29 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component _ A The reluctance is magnified when there are uncertainties associated with consistent supply and quality of the newly introduced product. Reluctance to change can be overcome by a variety p of marketing strategies. Among the keys to acceptance is the provision of accurate u information about the product to consumers. 0 SUMMARY As with many recycled materials, compost has not been widely marketed and therefore there is limited history from which to draw. However, programs throughout the country have shown that marketing or distribution of finished compost poses few problems if it is aesthetically appealing and the end user has reasonable assurance that it does not contain harmful substances.. In many situations, marketability of compost has proven to be the least of barriers in developing large-scale organic material recovery operations. Inadequate processing capability, inability to obtain suitable facility sites, and limited funding for equipment and labor often prove to be more problematic than o material marketing. A phased approach to market development could be very effective in Contra Costa County. In the o initial stages, landfills, parks, and homeowners could provide outlets for compost. As product quality is established and awareness increased through promotional activities, additional market o sectors can be targeted and developed, including those more likely to generate revenue. As experience is gained in the processing and composting of food wastes, specific market niches can be developed and secured. The Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone will present significant opportunities for new compost end uses as projects are developed and implemented. A SECTION VII: MONITORING AND EVALUATION o The monitoring program will provide the information necessary to evaluate the success of composting A programs and compliance with mandated diversion requirements using the following criteria: • Estimated tonnage of waste composted. • Estimated percent participation by target waste generators. . o • Estimated cost per ton of waste composted. • Ease of implementation. • Tons of compost marketed. • Market development activities. The County should retain the right to perform financial audit and technical evaluation of alternatives. a Reporting o All information will be reported quarterly to the County The Community Development Department will be responsible for performing monitoring functions; including information gathering, compiling, and report writing. o o Contra Costa County 6-30 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component Private firms involved in the collection of compostable materials will be required to report the following information on a monthly basis: • Quantity of compostable material collected ' • Participation rate in curbside collection programs • Marginal time and costs involved in implementing the curbside collection program Operators of compost facilities will be required to report the following information: ' • Monthly data on total tonnage of material received, by origin • Quarterly reports on markets and market development • Monthly data on estimated quantity of reject materials from the composting process • Costs incurred by the operator, passed on to ratepayers through tipping fees • Other supplementary measures as deemed necessary or desirable Procurement of Compost Products The County should track its own procurement of compost products Remedial Measures • The following measures will be employed, if necessary, if material quantities fall short of ' projected diversion for the composting programs: • Target additional materials for composting ' • Re-evaluate options not chosen • Research and evaluate new technologies, processes, and systems. • Determine need to revise or alter system, lower diversion goals, or substitute new diversion methods ' • Raise user fees on garbage collection to encourage greater participation_ r • Enforce with fines and other penalties the source separation of targeted materials ' SECTION VIII: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION The chart on the following pages outlines, for each action, the tasks required for implementation, ' the responsible agency, the timing of implementation, program costs and possible revenue sources. April 1993 6-31 Contra Costa County ' Final Draft SRRE Composting Component � w � .� a 9 a •o � ba > ww w ww w w 3 ww w 3 3 3 p 8 0 8 8 8 a y o �ni" Z 8 H va Z $ 16 E 603, v) a a Wo t 0% .9 ba to .41 ON c, a 0% a ° a w a W d 89 A. � � a d a 3 �° 0 � 0 a 3 3 °� � H ani ani y, u 3 u u a u u a u x x � � U U d p d U > y .+ o. ego G. ego 41. a Q o d ¢ ° o a a pa A4 c�G c,. a a oG o 3 ,_o o cd C 9 � b3 � b3 a ;� a as oma, a a a a oS dad Contra Costa County 6-32 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Composting Component w w w w w w w ' w � •o _o 0 0 _o � ,o •o z > u u u u u u >, 3 og - r r a U .a .� p � � •� 3 � � w o � w z 8 OIA 6% to p a. c. °° a 04o0 0� a so ¢, °,01� -� °% ONIDS H � r d � z ] 3 r a � W W oa A A A A A A p A A x x x U V UA U U U U pG U U Q, a' ts+ °qq° 4. 14 0 kn a eo a ao a oo �a .. `e ri a3i ao ° c3a UpQ, as :03 94 rIL r April 1993 6- 33 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Composting Component - I / � 3 l D y > p 000 o o > rn a to o a '.. 8 °124 U a § g § w `a .8 .2 2 .8 11 H zo z ZR z z D Qw•, � .� c°o a .� o°o 00 eo 0o eo wO � 9 � 9 U M pp M �O %0 00 .cd �O %DON O�q 00.0 000 W D ww z 3 z z z a� O A O D zz 3 o w o w D 0� A as A F-4 9 W CA O � AH a U U v 0 u u x U A U 00o v D a 04 4. o G V) `� o bCA 42 U LL U O Ow y 0 $ 3 � U � � ;�i ° A CA 10 V CA 13 10 6 6 6 OoG O 004 00G M a x v o w a w c D 1 Contra Costa County 6- 34 April 1993 final Draft SRRE Composting Component SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 1 I. Abandoned Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : 3 B. Existing Conditions . 3 C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ' D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 II°. AGRICULTURAL WASTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ' A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Background 5 . C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 ' D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 E. Selection of Programs 7 I1I. ASBESTOS WASTES . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . `. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 A. Summary of Selected Programs 7 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 C. Program Objectives . . . . ` 8 . , . • • • . . . . • • . • . . • • . . • • D. Evaluation of Alternatives • . . . . . • . • 8 ' IV. DEAD ANIMALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A. Summary of Selected Programs 8 B. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 8 ' C. Program Objectives 9 D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 9 V. INCINERATOR ASH . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 • A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 D. Evaluation of Alternatives 10 VI. MEDICAL WASTES 10 A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . 10 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ' C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . 12 D. Evaluation of Alternatives 12 E. Programs Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 F. Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 i r VII. PARK AND RECREATION AREA WASTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 t B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 E. Programs Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 , F. Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 G. Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 VIII. SEPTIC TANK PUMPINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 B. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 IX. SEWAGE SLUDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 ' A. Summary of Selected Programs 17 B. Existing Conditions in Contra Costa County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 , C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 , E. Programs Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 F. Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 G. Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 X. SHIPBOARD AND PORT WASTE28 ' . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 , C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 29 D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 E. Programs Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. . . . 29 , F. Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 G Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 XI. STREET SWEEPING AND CATCHBASIN DEBRIS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 ' C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 30 D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 XII. TIRES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 ' A. Summary of Selected Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 B. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 , C. Program Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 D. Evaluation of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 E. Programs Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 ' F. Program Implementation . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . 34 G. Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 - - r ii r LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 7-1: Acceptance of Special Wastes at Existing County Landfills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Table 7-2: Average Characteristics of Septage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 17 ' Table 7-3:. Current Sewage Sludge Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 18 iii r , r SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT r INTRODUCTION rThe California Integrated Waste Management Board has defined special wastes as those which require collection, processing, and disposal procedures different from those normally used for municipal solid wastes. The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 requires counties and cities to prepare and implement a special waste management program as part of their Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Although special wastes comprise a relatively small proportion of the wastes entering our county landfills, some pose significant risks, (e.g. medical wastes), and others present excellent opportunities for reuse or recycling (e.g. tires), and composting (e.g. agricultural wastes). ' I. Abandoned Vehicles II. Agricultural Wastes III. Asbestos.Wastes IV. Dead Animals V. Incinerator Ash ' IV. Medical Wastes VII. Park and Recreation Area Wastes VIII. Septic Tank Pumpings IX. Sewage Sludge X. Shipboard and Port Waste XI. Street Sweeping and Catchbasin Debris XII. Tires Among these materials, only those which are normally disposed of in landfills are listed in the Waste Characterization Study. Tires and Agricultural Wastes are categorized in the WCS as Organic wastes, but here are considered special wastes. r r rApril 1993 7- 1 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component r Of these materials, all are normally disposed of in landfills with the exception of abandoned vehicles and septic tank pumpings. Most of these materials require special handling and processing before being landfilled. , UPDATE Two landfills are currently operating in the county: the West County Sanitary Landfill, operated by Richmond Sanitary Service, and the Keller Canyon Landfill, operated by Browning-Ferris Industries. , Both landfills are permitted to accept most of the special wastes generated in the county, as detailed in Table 7-1. Table 7-1: Acceptance of Special Wastes at Existing County Landfills M Waste Type West County SLF Keller Canyon'LF Abandoned Vehicles No No , Agricultural Wastes Yes Yes Asbestos Yes No Dead Animals Yes Yes Incinerator Ash Yes Yes Medical Waste (treated) Yes Yes , Park and Recreation Waste. Yes Yes Septic Tank Pumpings No No , Sewage Sludge Yes Yes Shipboard and Port No No ' Street Sweepings & Catchbasin Yes Yes Tires Yes Yes The Component details the overall goals for special waste managment, and specific objectives, ' policies, and programs necessary to to reduce the risks posed by special wastes and to maximize recycling, reuse and composting of special waste. It is written in accordance with AB 939 and the regulations promulgated by the California Integrated Waste Managment Board. Each type of special waste will be discussed. in the following format, where appropriate: A. Summary of Selected Programs Contra Costa County 7- 2 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component , A B. Existing Conditions (overview, legislative background, current conditions in Contra Costa County) C. Program Objectives D. Evaluation of Alternatives E. Programs Selected F. Program Implementation G. Monitoring and Evaluation ' A Contra Costa County's overall special waste goals are: 1. Reduce the amount and hazardousness of special wastes generated; ' 2. Maximize recycling, reuse, and composting of special waste generated in the county through public education, legislation, and incentives; 3. Monitor and ensure environmentally safe disposal of the special waste generated which cannot be recycled, reused, or composted. ' 1. Abandoned Vehicles ' A.. Summary of Selected Programs 1. Implement the State-mandated program for collection, storage, and disposal of abandoned ' vehicles. B. Existing Conditions ' 1. Background Approximately 700,000 vehicles are registered in Contra Costa County. The Board of Supervisors has found that the accumulation and storage of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof on private and public property creates a condition tending to reduce the value of private property, to promote blight and deterioration, to invite plundering, to create fire hazards, to constitute an attractive nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of minors, to create a harborage for rodents,and insects, and to be injurious to the public health, safety, and general welfare (Ordinance No. 86-58 Section Iib). Abandoned vehicles have a scrap value. In order for an auto dismantler to claim an ' abandoned vehicle, paperwork must be filed to clear title to the vehicle. Only then can a dismantler remove the vehicle and process it for scrap value. Current scrap value is about $60.00 per ton. With the recent decline in scrap value and the increased cost in handling 1 AApril 1993 7- 3 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Special Waste Component 1 paperwork associated with abandoned vehicles, it has become unprofitable for scrap dealers to process them. New regulations also define parts of abandoned vehicles as hazardous waste; for example, mufflers have high lead content, and batteries contain corrosive acids. Plastic is also replacing metal parts in newer vehicles. All of these factors make it more expensive to process abandoned vehicles, and results in the production of more wastes from the ' processing. 2. Legislative and Administrative Overview County Ordinance 86-58 reactivated an Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program. This program, originally placed under the Building Departent, but later (1989) moved to the , Sheriff's Department, currently handles vehicles abandoned on public and private property within the unincorporated areas and, under contract, within several incorporated cities. The Sheriff's Department relies on Sections 22651, 22669, and 22658(a) of the California Vehicle ' Code to conduct its enforcement activities. The procedures the Department follows vary depending on whether the abandoned vehicle is on private or public property. During the first six months, of 1991, the Sheriff's Department towed 861 vehicles from the unincorporated , areas of the County. County Zoning investigations occasionally result in an order to remove improperly stored vehicles from private property. In these instances it is the property owner's responsibility to dispose of the vehicles properly. The Board of Supervisors has adopted a policy that, as a condition of approval, all new , landfills may be required to provide storage space for abandoned vehicles, though not necessarily at the landfill site, while titles are being cleared and until they can be salvaged. , At this time the Board of Supervisors has not implemented this condition. The need for implementation of this condition is evaluated annually. In 1990 Assembly Bill 4114 was enacted. This law allows cities and counties to establish ' service authorities for the abatement of abandoned vehicles, and allows service authorities to impose registration fees of $1 per vehicle to fund abatement programs. The County ' Administrative Officer's office has prepared and transmitted to the California Highway Patrol a proposed plan for a vehicle abatement program. This plan includes a $1 per vehicle registration fee to fund the program, and agreements with the cities in the County to continue to operate their own vehicle abatement programs under contract with the AB 4114 County Service Authority. The County will continue to operate its abatement program for the unincorporated. areas, with the Sheriffs Department responsible for abating vehicles ' abandoned on public property, and the County Housing Rehabilitation program responsible for private property. 3. Disposal of Abandoned Vehicles , Vehicles towed under the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program are towed to one of several wreckers located in the County. Auto wreckers drain the oil, gas, and anti-freeze and remove ' batteries, mufflers, tires, and reusable parts before selling the vehicles for scrap. Contra Costa County 7- 4 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component , Wreckers then ship vehicles, either who Id'6 r crushed, to one of the two shredders located in Northern California: Schnitzer Steel in Oakland, or LMC Metals in Redwood City. These businesses shred vehicles, and separate the shredded material into three components: ferrous metals, non-ferrous metals, and shredder fluff. Shredder fluff is a composite of plastic, fabric, foam rubber, etc. Presently, most of the metal resulting from shredding is exported to Asian countries for recycling; shredder fluff is landfilled. LMC landfills at Ox Mountain in San Mateo County and at Guadalupe Hills in Santa Clara County; Schnitzer landfills at Altamont Landfill in Alameda County. AC. Program Objectives Abandoned vehicle abatement programs should have the objectives of reducing or eliminating the hazards and nuisances associated with abandoned vehicles, and of reusing.and recycling, to the maximum extent feasible, abandoned vehicles. D. Evaluation of Alternatives The current abandoned vehicle abatement program, enhanced and firmly funded under AB 4114, and combined with the efforts of auto wreckers and metal recyclers, is considered sufficient to meet program objectives. 1 II. AGRICULTURAL WASTES A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. In conjunction with the County Agricultural Extension, the County should regularly monitor current disposal practices for agricultural wastes. ' 2. If changes in agricultural disposal methods have occurred which cause these wastes to be a disposal problem, such as state-imposed limits on agricultural burning, the County should evaluate alternative management methods, including composting: B. Background ' Agricultural wastes are the non-marketable portion of farm production, including prunings and various residues from field and vegetable crops. They also include dust, hair, and feathers from confined animals, carcasses of dead animals, and the wastes from food processing plants (e.g., canneries, slaughterhouses, and wineries). The majority of agricultural waste is reused on-site. Certain agricultural wastes that are pertinent to the County will be discussed below. The California Integrated Waste Management Board has adopted waste management practices for agricultural wastes (Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal; Agricultural Solid Waste Management Standards). ' Contra Costa County is a relatively minor agricultural county. Within the County, almost all of the agricultural production occurs in the northeastern section. Prime agricultural land also exists in other areas of the County, but encroaching urbanization is displacing arable land with housing. A 1 April 1993 7- S Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Special Waste Component 1 Increasing land values and residential pressures have caused a general decrease in agricultural acreage and a shift in the type of crops grown. The trend is away from fruit and nut crops, such as apricots and walnuts, to higher intensity row and vegetable crops. The trend will probably continue as fruit`and nut growing areas develop in other parts of the state and local demand for vegetable and row crops follows the increasing population. ' The dairy, beef, and other livestock industries in Contra Costa County are also limited by the increasing urbanization of the County. Most of the livestock is located in the eastern part of the County where residential pressures are growing. ' Since agricultural wastes are not generally disposed of at sanitary landfills and there is no record of problems encountered with the storage, handling or disposal of agricultural waste, current quantities are unknown, and no projections exist. Based on agricultural trends in the County and throughout California, no increases in agricultural waste are expected and decreases are likely to occur. ' Manure The largest potential source of problems for agricultural waste is with manure from confined animals. , Over 100 cattle ranching operations are located in the County, while another.30 ranches raise other livestock, including dairy cattle, hogs, and sheep. Manure does not dry or decompose rapidly and can present a serious health problem. Manure from these sources is a special case of agricultural , waste, since it has value as a fertilizer or soil conditioner, and if the handling costs can be offset by this value, the manure is a byproduct rather than a waste. As such, the nuisance potential is dependent on the cost of commercial fertilizer. Because the cost of commercial fertilizer is relatively ' high and is not expected to decrease significantly, manure from feedlots, dairies, and stables is finding a ready market as a fertilizer or soil amendment, and very few storage or disposal problems occur. Manure from feedlots is suitable for use in composting operations. Fresh manure (cattle, horse, poultry) must be mixed with a dry, absorbent material (straw, dried leaves, sawdust, waste ' paper, or wood chips) or dried to minimize compaction during composting. Currently, there are several cattle operations that scrape the feedlots in the summer and sell the manure to home gardeners by the pickup load. There is one facility that separates the solids before selling the product. The remainder is taken to range or pasture land. Pruning, Vegetable, and Fruit Crop Residues ' Virtually all of the orchard crop farms with significant annual sales are located on East County lands adjacent to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, with the exception of several green houses and ' nursery operators located near Richmond in West County. The main vegetable and seed crops are tomatoes, asparagus, sweet corn, and squash. The primary fruit and nut crops are walnuts, almonds, ' apricots, pears, cherries, and grapes. Presently, most of the agricultural wastes are disposed of on- site, on neighboring agricultural land, or burned in the field. Field and vegetable crop residues are reincorporated directly into the soil, while fruit and nut tree residues are generally shredded and ' disked into the soil or burned. These procedures have kept nuisance conditions to a minimum in Contra Costa County. Field Crops The most significant source of agricultural wastes is stubble from field crop production. Presently, these crops are barley, wheat, oats, sugar beets, and rye. , Contra Costa County 7- 6 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component , Q Open field burning has traditionally been the method of disposal for the waste from field crop harvesting and pruning residues. As such, these wastes have not yet entered the solid waste stream. nBecause field burning is the most important factor affecting these wastes, a short discussion follows. u Residue burning is practiced for several types of wastes: • Stumps and limbs that are too large to be shredded • Almond and walnut prunings, where chips interfere with harvesting machinery • Diseased trees or prunings • Grain and seed crops where disease must be controlled by burning • Grain crops where a second crop is to be planted immediately. Agricultural burning is conducted within the limitations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District/Air Resources Board codes and regulations. Presently, there.are no indications that agricultural burning will be banned or severely curtailed in the near future. If there is a change in the policy on agricultural burning, new disposal methods would have to be considered. Alternative methods such as composting should then be analyzed. C. Program Objectives Program objectives for agricultural wastes are to ensure that they do not cause a nuisance and that they are being utilized to the greatest extent possible. D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives ° ' Since there is little agricultural waste entering the waste stream, and since utilization rates are high, the appropriate course of action to meet program objectives is to monitor the production and use of ' agricultural wastes. E. Selection of Programs 1. In conjunction with the County Agricultural Extension, the County should regularly monitor current disposal practices for agricultural wastes. 2. If changes in agricultural disposal methods have occurred which cause these wastes to be a disposal problem, such as state-imposed limits on agricultural burning, the County should evaluate alternative management methods, including composting. III. ASBESTOS WASTES A. Summary of Selected Programs The current system for disposal of asbestosis considered adequate, and no changes are anticipated. April 1993 7- 7 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE • Special Waste Component B. Existing Conditions Asbestos was used extensively prior to 1970 for ceiling and floor tile and insulation for pipes, t boilers, and ducts. Airborne particles of asbestos have been recognized as a health risk and consequently the use of asbestos in certain applications has been banned. The generation of asbestos- containing waste is a result'of compliance with federal and state laws. Although no asbestos was identified as disposed in the County Waste characterization study, the West County Landfill is permitted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board to accept asbestos waste ' for disposal. Keller Canyon Landfill is not. Manifest records maintained by the State Department of Health Services indicate that asbestos continues to be landfilled in Contra Costa County. Legislative background , Prior to 1990 Senate Bill 2572 (Statutes of 1986) required county Solid Waste Management Plans ' revised after January 1, 1987 to include an assessment of the amount of asbestos waste generated in the County and an identification of the sites or potential sites which have been designated to accept this waste. Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations requires asbestos waste to be manifested. Records for generation and disposal are maintained within the Manifest Information System administered by the State Department of Health Services. t Since management of asbestos is a public health matter there are no opportunities for diversion. The only alternative for managing asbestos waste is proper disposal in landfills. As it is replaced with , other materials, the generation of asbestos waste is expected to decrease gradually. C. Program Objectives Program objectives are to prevent asbestos from becoming a health hazard. D. Evaluation of Alternatives The current system of transporting and methods for disposal are considered adequate to meet ' program objectives. IV. DEAD ANIMALS A. Summary of Selected Programs ' The management and diversion practices in the County for dead animals is considered adequate, and no changes are anticipated. B. Background The collection and disposal of dead animal carcasses in the public right of way is presently being P P Y g conducted by the County Animal Services Department for all areas of the County except the City of Contra Costa County 7- 8 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component , Antioch, which has its own Animal Services Department. If the dead animal is on private property, 11 it is the property owner's responsibility. State agencies are responsible for dead animals found on highways or state property. The Animal Services Departments are responsible for ensuring that collection and disposal of dead animal carcasses adequately protect public health. The County Health Services Department (HSD) is available for consultation on public health-related matters. Landfills in the county are permitted to accept dead animals for disposal, although few carcasses are handled in this manner. Small dead animals can be disposed of at the active tipping area of the landfill. Large dead animals and large quantities of small dead animals are normally disposed of at the base of the active face by digging a hole and covering them immediately with soil. The primary management practice for dead animals in the County is to contract for disposal with Koefran Services of Sacramento. Koefran provides cold boxes at animal shelters for storing animal remains in barrels. Koefran collects approximately 40 barrels of animal remains on a twice-weekly basis from County Animal Health Services and transports them to Sacramento, where the remains are recycled into bone meal and fertilizer by a rendering company. Large animals must be collected and processed by a rendering plant within 48 hours of death. C. Program Objectives Program objectives are to prevent dead animals from becoming a health hazard or a nuisance. D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives The management and diversion practices in the County for dead animals is considered adequate, and no changes are anticipated. V. INCINERATOR ASH • A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. The current system-of utilization and disposal is considered adequate. B. Existing Conditions Overview There are several sources of incinerator ash in the unincorporated areas of the County. Although there are no municipal solid waste incinerators, there are incinerators which burn various types of solid waste to generate energy. The ash generated by incineration sometimes requires special handling, as toxic contents of the original materials can become concentrated in the resulting ash. ' Legislative Background Incineration facilities are governed by permit processes which regulate the disposal of ash as solid or hazardous waste, depending on its contaminant content. tApril 1993 7- 9 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component Current Conditions The Gaylord Container Corporation operates a cogeneration facility in Antioch, which burns urban waste wood to produce steam. Most of the wood is construction waste. The plant operated until March 4, 1991, and was then closed for an indefinite period, but with plans to reopen. When operating, 400 to 500 tons of_ash per month are generated, which are landfilled. GWF Power Systems Company Inc. operates the Wilbur Avenue East Power Plant incinerators, which burn oil sludge for energy. The plant consists of three facilities in the unincorporated area of the County, along with two in the City of Pittsburg (The Wilbur Avenue West Power Plant r comprises several more in areas recently annexed into the city of Antioch). The plants burn petroleum coke, a by-product of petroleum refining, with lime added for clean burning. The remaining ash is sold to the cement industry as a raw material. Each of the three plants in the , unincorporated area generates about 20 tons of ash per day. C. Program Objectives Program objectives are to divert from combustion materials that may be diverted through source reduction, recycling, or composting; to utilize to the greatest feasible extent that incinerator ash which is produced; and to handle and dispose of all unusable incinerator ash in an environmentally safe manner. D. Evaluation of Alternatives Currently, the ash from the GWF facilities is utilized in cement making. The Gaylord plant is not currently operating. The present system of handling incinerator ash is therefore considered adequate. If the Gaylord plant reopens, the County should consider programs to reduce landfilling of ash from that facility. ' VI. MEDICAL WASTES , A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. The Director of Merrithew Memorial Hospital shall make a report to the Board of Supervisors on replacing disposable medical supplies with reusables. 2. The Community Development Department shall work with the staff of Merrithew Memorial ' to institute a system for source reduction and recycling of non-contaminated wastes produced at the Hospital, e.g. beverage containers, cafeteria serviceware, and office paper. B. Existing Conditions Overview Medical facilities such as hospitals, nursing homes, laboratories, clinics, and doctors'offices generate a variety of solid wastes. In addition to garbage and office rubbish, wastes of special concern ' include anatomic materials,bandages,dressings,casts, cultures, outdated drugs and chemicals, spent Contra Costa County 7- 10 APril 1993 , Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component syringes and needles, and discarded sharp surgical instruments. Such materials are of concern because they represent: - A source of infection to the public, as well as to hospital personnel and collection crews; I - A direct occupational hazard for collectors from punctures from discarded needles and surgical instruments; - Dangers from drugs and chemicals. The increasing use of disposable items (e.g. single-dose or single-use items such as diapers, needles, and medicines) has been primarily responsible for the rise in per patient hospital solid wastes. While such disposable items are convenient and minimize the risk of spreading infections, their use has increased the solid waste generated by medical facilities. This represents an area where source reduction could be most effective. Legislative background On January 1, 1991, AB 109 and its companion legislation, AB 1641, went into effect. Together, these bills are resulting in a complete revision of existing medical waste management practices. While additional enabling regulations can be expected in the coming years, the Medical Waste Management Act now governs the handling and disposal of medical wastes. Current conditions Contra Costa County's Merrithew Memorial Hospital in Martinez(which is within city limits but will be addressed as a County facility for the purposes of this report) is the largest generator of medical wastes in the County. According to the hospital's administrator in charge of waste disposal, David Jett, the facility is presently generating an average of sixty 44-gallon barrels of"red-bagged" medical wastes each day. These barrels are collected from designated areas of the hospital and taken to a storage area on the hospital grounds. Integrated Environmental Systems (a Norcal company) of ' Oakland picks up the full containers and replaces them with empty ones. The waste is transported to IES's facility in Oakland for microwaving. By contrast, the hospital's non-medical waste (kitchen garbage and rubbish from the facility's administrative offices) is removed to an on-site compactor and picked up every four to five days by Martinez Sanitary Company. While Merrithew Memorial is the largest generator of medical wastes in the County, there are other facilities which are significant generators of medical wastes in the unincorporated areas. There are at least three nursing homes: Live Oak Living Center-Greenridge Heights, and the Jana Vista Rest Home in El Sobrante, and Edith Villa's Board and Care Home in Rodeo. There are also several medical clinics or groups: Discovery Bay Medical Clinic in Byron; Rodeo Medical Center in Rodeo; and the Alamo Medical Group in Alamo. There are at least 18 dentists in El Sobrante, all on San Pablo Dam Road, mostly in solo practice. Finally, there are several veterinarians and veterinary clinics, funeral homes, and taxidermists in the unincorporated part of the County. All of these ' entities, even those generating "small quantities" (less than 200 pounds per month), must comply with the terms of the Medical Waste Management Act, to the extent that even if they "treat" their r April 1993 7- 11 Contra Costa County Final Dra,J3 SRRE Special Waste Component medical wastes to render them into solid wastes they must still register with the enforcement agency and meet the necessary treatment standards. Of the two landfills in the County, neither is accepting medical or infectious wastes at this time. The West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill accepted its last delivery on March 7, 1991, rather than try to meet the more stringent requirements which took effect April 1, 1991. The facility will continue to ' accept properly treated medical wastes, as they have been rendered innocuous solid waste and, as such, are no longer subject to the terms of the Medical Waste Management Act. Keller Canyon Landfill is permitted to accept treated medical waste. C. Program Objectives Program objectives are to comply with the Medical Waste Management Act, and to promote the maximum safe, feasible level of source reduction of medical wastes. D. Evaluation of Alternatives Because of the obvious danger presented by medical wastes, recycling is not an option for disposal of these wastes. The best treatment for medical wastes that have been generated will therefore continue to use those methods which render the medical wastes innocuous enough to be disposed of as solid waste. Such methods presently include autoclaving (steam sterilization) and microwaving. Incineration is also employed, but it is not the best method in light of its impacts on air quality and the problematic disposal of the residual ash. Source reduction is an option for some medical wastes, such as baby and adult disposable diapers, which can be replaced with reusable cotton; and perhaps the replacement of some disposable medical supplies with reusables. The Board of Supervisors could direct the Director.of Merrithew Memorial Hospital to evaluate the potential of replacing disposable diapers and other medical supplies with reusables. E. Programs Selected The director of Merrithew Memorial Hospital shall within one year of the adoption of this plan prepare a report to the Board evaluating the potential of replacing disposable diapers and other disposable medical supplies with reusables. The report shall include a proposal for a program to disseminate to small quantity generators of medical wastes information on source reduction of medical wastes. F. Program Implementation This program shall be jointly overseen by the Health Services Department and the Community Development Department. No funds beyond existing staff time are required for the implementation of this program. Contra Costa County 7- 12 April 1993 r Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component VII. PARK AND RECREATION AREA WASTES A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. Establish recycling and composting programs for parks administered by the County. 2. Encourage the East Bay Regional Parks District and the California Department of Parks'and Recreation to increase their source reduction, recycling, and composting efforts. B. Existing Conditions Overview Although solid wastes originating in parks and recreational areas do not generally require any special handling or disposal, they are considered special wastes because they are generated within the jurisdiction, but their management is administered by agencies other than the normal franchising agencies. Park and recreation area wastes were not separately characterized or quantified in the WCS. Contra Costa County has 47 park sites in the unincorporated areas of the County. The large majority are administered by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), while Mt. Diablo State Park and Frank's Tract are administered by the State Parks Department. Six small parks are administered by County General Services, Maintenance Division. Current conditions a. EBRPD Within EBRPD, waste management is organized for each individual park. The EBRPD contracts with private haulers for collection of refuse from each park. In 1988,the Board of Directors of the EBRPD passed a resolution stating that recycling was a priority. Since that time, a variety of recycling and waste reduction programs have been instituted. Precycling at the concessions is taking place district-wide. Styrofoam has.been banned; plastics have been reduced and replaced with paper where possible; individual condiment packets have been replaced by pump dispensers. Vegetative wastes such as clippings, prunings and-leaves are left where they are when possible or taken to picnic and camping areas for mulch. The EBRPD has three chippers available on a loan-out basis to the individual parks; one of the chippers is primarily dedicated to the Contra Costa Trails unit. The Contra Costa Trails unit gathers much vegetative wastes while keeping trails clear. Large pieces of wood are used for firewood for Park Ranger residences and in corporation yard buildings. Prunings are chipped and used for mulch nearby or in other parks. Diseased matter goes to one of the Sanitary Landfills in the County. Within the past few years much less vegetative waste has been placed in trash containers. April 1993 7- 13 Contra Costa County. Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component California Redemption Value (CRV) beverage containers may be deposited by the public in recycling containers located in busy parts of most parks. The recycled materials are collected and sold by the parks themselves, by private citizens (for example, senior citizens); or by the East Bay Conservation Corps (EBCC). About two years ago EBCC established specially designed, District-approved, pilfer-proof containers. EBCC now maintains three sites in Tilden Park, with four more planned within the District, and EBCC would like to expand. In the past, Pacific Rim Recycling of Benicia maintained several recycling "igloos" in Briones Park. However, residents used the igloos for recyclables brought from home, the igloos overflowed, and subsequently Pacific Rim removed them. Pacific Rim would like to replace the igloos at a later date, after other recycling programs have become available to the public. Within EBRPD facilities and offices, several recycling programs are in place, for r materials such as motor oil, vehicle batteries, and office paper. Litter is picked up and generally deposited in the trash, except (as in Tilden Park) when time allows park workers to collect aluminum cans separately and recycle them. In some areas citizens may gather up littered redemption materials. Scrap metal is generally stockpiled and sold to scrap metal dealers periodically. In the Trails unit, heavy materials such as concrete, rock and asphalt are stockpiled and when enough accumulates the park orders a debris box from their hauler. Dogs must be leashed in developed or posted areas of the EBRPD. Dogs are allowed off- leash in designated park areas, including Point Isabel. In some other. areas "pooper-scoopers" have been made available to the public for a small fee (a quarter). Wastes are deposited in the trash receptacles and landfilled along with general rubbish. Sanitary and septic wastes go to the sewage plants of the particular locality. Waste from r portable toilets and holding tanks go to San Ramon/Dublin Sewage Treatment Plant or Ora Loma Sanitation Department. All sewage is regularly monitored by laboratories for the presence of hazardous waste. Private dumping on park land has been a problem in several areas: (1) Prunings are dropped from homes bordering the trails and the trail crews ask the homeowners to remove the prunings. (2) Some areas have become dumping grounds. In the past, the East Bay Conservation Corps had funding to reclaim those areas for park land; less funding is available now. (3) The public occasionally deposits materials not generated during park visits in the recycling bins. Contra Costa County 7- 14 APril 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component (4) According to the Trail Supervisor for Contra Costa, landscapers were allowed to deposit their shredded prunings at the park to be used as mulch until a few years ago; however, some trash was mixed in, and the quantities became too great for park personnel to handle. Also, the parks have been chipping and generating their own mulch recently. b. State Parks Mt. Diablo State park is administered by the Diablo District of the State Parks Department. Currently, solid wastes from recreation sites in the park, as well as litter, are disposed in landfills. Litter and trash have decreased since the prohibition a few years ago of alcoholic beverages in the park, and since camping has been suspended due to the drought. The Park Service is exploring the possibility of using park personnel to separate CRV beverage.containers and scrap metal from mixed waste and litter. Recycled materials would be sold by volunteers of the Mt. Diablo Interpretive Association as a fundraiser. Frank's Tract is currently under water. c. County-Maintained Parks There are six County-maintained parks in the unincorporated area, Cornell and O'Hara Park in East County, Hop McGee and Clyde Park in Central County, and Valona and Montara Bay Park in West County. All parks are maintained by General Services Grounds Maintenance Division. Currently, the County uses mulching mowers and collects and chips brush and tree trimming for mulch. All other wastes are currently landfilled. 0 C. Program Objectives Program objectives for park and recreation area wastes are to source reduce, recycle, and compost the maximum feasible amount of these materials. D. Evaluation of Alternatives EBRPD and State parks are administered by non-County agencies, and are outside of the control of the County. The most appropriate action for the County to take regarding these parks, which constitute the majority of the parks in the unincorporated areas, is to monitor waste management and diversion activities in the parks, and to encourage the administering agencies to implement all feasible diversion programs. The County could also offer technical assistance to the agencies in planning and implementing diversion programs. Several program options exist for County administered-parks: 1. install recycling containers in all parks, to be serviced by County staff, a private hauler, or a community group; and April 7- 1S Contra Costa County tY Final Draft SRRE ' Special Waste Component 2. implement landscape waste reduction, through installing drought-resistant plants, using mulching mowers, chipping brush, and composting on-site. E. Programs Selected The County shall establish recycling programs in all parks and study the feasibility of on-site composting, to supplement current County-administered source reduction programs. The County will encourage and cooperate with the EBRPD and the California Department of Parks and Recreation to increase their source reduction, recycling, and composting efforts. The County will encourage the park systems to report annual tonnage of diversion achieved. F. Program Implementation The County General Services Division.will work with the County Community Development r Department to implement the County parks program. The County Community Development Department will work with the state and regional park systems to coordinate efforts. No funds beyond existing staff time are required for the implementation of this program. G. Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and program evaluation will be accomplished by a quarterly report from the General Services Department. VIII. SEPTIC.TANK PUMPINGS A. Summary of Selected Programs The existing system for handling septage is considered adequate, and no changes are needed. B. Background Septic tank pumpings are materials removed from residential cesspools and from satellite toilets. Accurate data on septic tank pumpings and chemical toilet wastes are not readily available. These ' wastes are disposed of at wastewater treatment plants after collection by companies servicing septic tanks and chemical toilets. These facilities accept the waste at different points in the treatment process: some plants add it to their digester, while others apply it to aeration ponds. The volume of septic tank pumpings is directly related to the population of the unsewered communities in the County. The volume of wastes from chemical toilets is directly related to the number of commercial jobsites and other applications requiring portable toilet service. . Significant quantities of nitrogen (ammonia)'are present in septage that could be useful in composting yard waste. The National Forest Service currently is developing septage composting programs at its facilities throughout the United States. This program will provide a low cost method of treating Contra Costa County 7- 16 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component the material to kill pathogens while controlling-odor. The following table indicates the average characteristics of septage. TABLE 7-2: Average Characteristics of Septage Parameter (mg/1) Total Solids 3,880 Volatile Solids 677 Ammonia 177 Total Phosphorus 253 Ph 6.9 (Source: Septage Treatment and Disposal Handbook, U.S. E.P.A., October, 1984, p.27. • C. Program Objectives The objectives of managing septage are to dispose of them in an environmentally safe, preferably useful manner. D. Evaluation of Alternatives The existing system for handling septage is considered adequate, and no changes are needed. Since all septage in the County is handled by wastewater treatment plants, this waste poses no distinct hazard to humans or the environment through mismanagement. Recommendations for alternative handling methods are contained in the section on sewage sludge below. IX. SEWAGE SLUDGE A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. Encourage sanitary districts to reuse sewage sludge through composting, land application, or chemical fixation. 2. Encourage County agencies to utilize sludge-derived products In public works projects involving new landscaping, maintenance of existing lawns and/or gardens, or the establishment of crops or vegetation. ' 3. Encourage industry by tax incentives or other financial means to recycle and pretreat waste by-products as much as possible to render cleaner sludges that can be safely utilized as fertilizers, soil conditioners, or otherwise reused. April 1993 7- 17 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component 4. Provide technical assistance to small companies that desire to construct and implement recycling programs and equipment to recycle and pretreat by-products. 5. Require school districts to provide at least a one-half semester course in environmental science at elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools that includes a session on wastewater treatment, sludge, and sludge management. 6. Regularly monitor current disposal practices and.the status of state legislation and regulations affecting the disposition of sewage sludge. t B. Existing Conditions in Contra Costa County Wastewater generated in Contra Costa County is treated at one of 13 treatment facilities. These facilities and the quantities of sewage sludge they produce are listed below: Table 7-3: Current Sewage Sludge Disposal FAgency Areas Served Sludge Quantities Dis osal Brentwood Brentwood 425 TPY at 7% solids Land applied (30 dry TPY) on site Central Contra Costa Central and South 8,500 TPY of incinerator Redwood Sanitary District County ash Landfill (Marin Co.) Crockett/Valona San. Crockett 3,650 TPY at 15% solids C&H Landfill District (550 dry TPY) (unclassified) Delta Diablo Pittsburg, Antioch, 96,200 TPY at 14-15% Land applied in West Pittsburg solids (14,430 dry TPY) the Central ' Valley Dublin San Ramon Part of San Ramon and 62,000 TPY at 1.5% Dedicated land Sanitary Dist. Dublin solids (930 dry TPY) disposal Mt. View Sanitary Vine Hill 1,300 TPY at 25% solids On-site natural District (325 dry TPY) wetland marsh Pinole Pinole/Hercules 350 TPY at 13% solids West Contra (47 dry TPY) Costa Sanitary Landfill Rodeo Sanitary Rodeo 1,000 TPY at 84% solids West Contra District (840 dry TPY) Costa Sanitary Landfill WCCSD, City of San Pablo, Richmond 3,000 TPY bed dried West Contra Richmond (2,500 dry TPY) Costa Sanitary Landfill (Source: Contra Costa County Solid Waste Management Plan, 1989 and interviews with sanitary district operators, March, 1991). Contra Costa County 7- 18 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component Currently, five districts in the County landfill sludge. The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District incinerates most of its sludge for volume.reduction, and landfills 500 tons per month of ash. The district landfills some sludge as a backup to the incineration process. The West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill accepts dewatered sludge for landfilling from the WCCSL. Three districts spread their sludge on agricultural lands. Overview of Environmental Impacts of Sewage Sludge Reuse Plant, human, and animal wastes have been applied to agricultural land for hundreds of years for waste disposal.and to increase the fertility of the soil. The improvement in crop yields is clearly evident where such materials are added to soil. Recently, scientists have become interested in changes in crop quality, especially the concentration of metals in the crop, where wastes are applied to soil. While all organic wastes contain metals, sewage sludge is enriched in metals. Use of such wastes on soil must be guided by sound agronomic principles. Metals can be beneficial and are in fact necessary to proper plant growth, but excessive amounts of metals in the soil can be toxic. The key to beneficial use of organic wastes is understanding the relationship of metals and their effects on the environment. Origins of Metals Metals are naturally present in soil, water, food, and fiber. The original sources of metals in the environment were rocks and minerals. With weathering over time, these rocks became soil. Runoff from the soil introduced metals to the aquatic environment. Metals present in soil also allowed terrestrial plant and animal life to develop. The metals were later extracted from ores and used in manufacturing, further distributing them in the environment. When these metals began to have a noticeable effect on the environment, scientific studies were conducted to identify the impacts of the metals on plant and animal life. The Heavy Metal Issue Heavy metals is a term generally understood to mean metals such as cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. But it also includes iron, manganese, and other metals. The presence of metals in sludge applied to agricultural land has caused a great deal of concern because of their potential toxicity to plants, animals, and humans. However, research by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and state colleges of agriculture over the past two decades or more has revealed that the heavy metal problem is not a simple issue. Metals are essential to normal growth of plants, animals, and humans, but in excess they can be toxic. Research has shown that metals such as cadmium and lead can be toxic to humans and animals, while copper, nickel, and zinc can be toxic to plants (phytotoxic). Cadmium is the metal of greatest concern to humans because it is absorbed from soil by plants which may be consumed by humans and animals. Lead is of lesser concern because it is not absorbed appreciably by plants and must be consumed directly by ingestion of soil or plants to which the sludge is adhering. Phytotoxicity from copper, nickel, and zinc in sludges applied at fertilizer rates to soils has seldom been.reported. Plant and animal nutritionists have also researched the beneficial effects of metals. Copper, chromium, nickel, and zinc are known to be essential trace elements for growth of plants and animals. For example, zinc, copper, manganese, and iron are commonly present as mineral supplements in tablet form. In human diets, zinc deficiency is second only to iron. Chromium, selenium, and molybdenum are also essential to normal growth and development. Plant nutritionists April 1993 7- 19 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component have identified boron, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, and zinc as essential micronutrients. Sludge applied at fertilizer rates to agricultural soils can correct-micronutrient deficiencies in soils and also reduce the need for supplements in animal feeds. Composted sewage sludge used in horticultural potting media has been shown to provide all required micronutrients for plant growth.- Legislative rowth:Legislative and Regulatory Background In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposed rule governing the treatment and disposal of sewage sludge, presenting a dramatically new risk assessment model designed to simulate the movement of the constituents in sludge through the air, water, land, and i foodchain. The proposed regulations would prohibit sludge which is applied to agricultural land from exceeding specified annual rates for fifteen organic constituents. These annual "loading rates" are purportedly established to ensure that the organic constituent concentration in the soil resulting from each year's sludge application does not produce a significant carcinogenic risk if the growing plants,or grazing animals are eaten by humans. There is not, however, conclusive scientific evidence to support this claim. The rule would have a negative impact on efforts to use sewage sludge for beneficial purposes. Recent legislation passed in California will also affect the disposition of sewage sludge. AB 2295 ' (1989)promotes the use of sludge as a fertilizer and landfill cover material. SB 1322 (1989)requires the Departments of Forestry, Parks and Recreation, and General Services to use treated sewage sludge and sludge co-composted with yard waste in public land restoration projects, state landscaping projects, and park and recreational area maintenance programs. The intent of these laws conflict with the EPA's proposed rule. The state laws will significantly impact the markets for yard waste products for two reasons: sewage sludge is useful for co-composting with yard waste because of its high nitrogen and moisture content, and finished sludge composts compete in the soil amendment marketplace. There is continuing controversy over whether sewage sludge should count toward waste diversion goals. The CIWMB, in cooperation with the Water Resources Control Board and the Department of Health Services, issued a report examining whether recycled-and composted sludge should count towards waste diversion percentages. The report reaches the following conclusions: • Agricultural land application presents no significant incremental risk to public health. j • While the existing system is capable of regulating sludge management, its application is inconsistent and the responsibilities of the implementing agencies are unclear and overlapping. • EPA's proposed regulations should be used as a foundation for the. development of a comprehensive regulatory program for sludge disposal and reuse. • Sludge should be counted toward the AB 939 diversion requirement as soon as the regulatory system has been modified to give it the capability to address site-specific issues with a coordinated and more consistent approach. The regulatory environment for sewage sludge will continue to change and be further refined. The criteria used in EPA's rule will likely be modified and the standards relaxed,to allow for beneficial reuse. Given the strong push by the state legislature, there is potential for a large increase in sewage _ Contra Costa County 7- 20 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component sludge reuse in California once the regulatory system is overhauled. Sewage sludge beneficial reuse programs are already well established in the Bay Area, and the state legislation will increase the range of acceptable uses for sewage sludge products. Several private companies operating in the Bay Area have expressed an interest in co-composting sewage sludge and yard waste at their landfills. This not only would divert the sewage sludge fraction (8-10% of the total waste generated) of the waste stream from landfills, .but would also be an effective combination of nitrogenous and carbonaceous materials. There will likely be continued changes and additions to laws at both the state and federal level, hence recovery programs should be planned with the greatest degree of flexibility possible to allow easy and efficient modifications. C. Program Objectives The program objectives for managing sewage sludge are to dispose of or reuse it in an environmentally safe manner. D. Evaluation of Program Alternatives 1. Composting Composting is the controlled biological decomposition of solid organic materials. The end product of composting is a stable humus that can be used as a soil conditioner, mulch, or fertilizer, depending upon its physical and chemical properties. The number of sludge composting projects in the United States has increased dramatically in the last decade, from a total of 90 in 1983 to 255 in 1990 (Biocycle, December, 1990, p.27). The three most common processes for composting sewage sludge are aerated static pile, windrow, and in-vessel. A fourth method, employed by the Fallbrook Sanitary District in San Diego, is vermicomposting, the transformation of organic material by earthworm activity. In many states land application is still the most preferable and least costly method of sludge management. Composting, in some cases, is actually the back-up method to land application, used when haulers cannot get onto agricultural land due to inclement weather. Elsewhere, shifts are being made from land application to composting because land development is forcing municipalities to haul further and further away, drastically changing the economics of that disposal method. The rising interest in composting is due in part to increasing sophistication of technology and the level of operational knowledge. Plant operators, city officials, and consulting engineers are looking more critically at management options, and are more aware that compost systems are not "black box" technical solutions. Sludge composting is often chosen as a management technology for a number of reasons, including: • Ability to further stabilize sludge; • Ease in product handling; • . Increase in product disposition outlets; April 1993 7- 21 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component • Reduced number of landfills that take sludge with a high moisture content • Cost-effective alternative to 'increasingly expensive disposal options. There has been a large increase in the number of projects across the country that are using or plan to use yard waste as a bulking agent in sludge composting. This is attributable partly to decreased landfill availability, and partly to local and state legislation that mandates yard waste recovery programs. The increasing number of yard waste projects enhances interest in sewage sludge composting, since the two materials can be co-composted, reducing overall costs and land requirements. Depending on costs and other factors associated with current sludge management approaches, the County should promote the composting of sewage sludge. As indicated above, it would probably be necessary to use a bulking agent in sludge composting. Wood chips produced from yard waste are a potential source of material. Regulatory constraints and costs are major considerations. As with all sludge reuse or recycling options, special attention must be given to potential contaminants. EVALUATION OF COMPOSTING Effectiveness. This alternative would be effective in diverting sewage sludge from disposal, dependent upon the characteristics and size of the facility,.and the availability of end markets. These i. factors may limit the amount of waste that can be composted and decrease the amount of waste that can be diverted from landfilling. Hazard: The primary hazards associated with land application pertain to human health, safety, and environmental impacts. Worker exposure to pathogens is possible in a composting operation. This hazard can be overcome by providing appropriate personal protective equipment and health and safety training. Environmental hazards associated with the composting of sludge include soil-contamination, surface and groundwater pollution, odor, and the uptake of heavy metals or other contaminants into plants or animals that may reach the human food chain. These hazards may affect human health and/or the environment, and it is therefore critical that composting programs be adequately planned, operated, and monitored. The distribution of compost products must adequately address these impacts by informing the end user of the potential hazards and limitations on use of the product. Implementation Period: Implementation of a sewage sludge composting program can be accomplished within two years. However, sewage sludge composting facilities are not simple to _permit in California, as the potential for surface and groundwater pollution must be thoroughly evaluated. The permitting of this type of activity can often take one to two years and thus would be potentially feasible in the short-term. Facility Requirements: No additional facilities would be needed. Sewage sludge can be composted in windrows on the sites of most wastewater treatment plants. Consistency With Local Plans and Policies: In most cases, this alternative would.not conflict with local conditions, including policies,plans, and ordinances. Permits from the Regional Water Quality Contra a County Co a Cost ry 7- 22 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component Control Board, the Integrated Waste Management Board, and the Local Enforcement Agency would be required. Institutional Barriers: Established operations at wastewater treatment facilities may prove to be a barrier to establishing composting operations on-site. In some cases there is not enough available land for a,full-scale operation. . Costs: Costs on the order of$80-120 per dry ton are commonly reported at existing sewage sludge composting facilities across the country. 2. Landspreading Land application of sludge involves spreading it on the soil surface and incorporating it into the root zone. The basic idea is to apply sludge to a plot of land that will be used for growing an agricultural crop or other vegetation (i.e., park land or forest land). Used in this manner, the sludge serves as a soil conditioner and as a source of nutrients that partially replace commercial fertilizers. For agricultural, forest, and land reclamation applications, sludge is a valuable resource to improve the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil. Sludge promotes soil aggregation, improves- soil chemical properties, increases water retention, permits easier root penetration, and improves soil texture, which in turn reduces runoff and erosion and makes the soil easier to work. Management of a system where sludge is used for crop growth is more complex than land disposal because growing of crops requires a careful balancing of available nutrients. Many municipalities and sewer districts throughout the country are successfully using sludge for land application, and have been doing so for many decades. Nationally, approximately 25% .of sludge is land applied (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Regulations and Technologies, 1984). In California, land application is more prevalent than landfilling in agricultural areas; statewide, approximately 15% is currently land applied (California Association of Sanitary Agencies survey, 1988). Sludge is applied to the land in either a wet or dry form. Wet sludges are sprayed onto the land utilizing a tanker truck with a pump and nozzle attachment. Dry sludges are applied with equipment commonly used to spread animal manure or commercial fertilizers. In this method, sludge is typically disked into the soil on the same day that it is placed on the land.. Sludge can be applied below the surface utilizing a tank truck following a cutting disk which creates a narrow furrow. Subsurface injection minimizes the need to mix the sludge into the soil and reduces potential exposure and odor problems. Land-applying sludge is a technically feasible management option because it utilizes the same machinery prevalent in agricultural operations. Equipment that spreads and incorporates fertilizers into the soil is readily available and new designs are continually developed. In addition, specialized tank trucks have been developed for the application of liquid sludge in hilly terrain and in forested areas. April 1993 7- 23 Contra Costa County Final Drag}SRRE Special Waste Component Enforceability An extensive regulatory program is required to enforce the land application of sludge. It is necessary to have a thorough understanding of the sludge quality, the properties of the land where the sludge is to be placed, and the land use. A sludge analysis would include an assessment of heavy metals, pathogens, and toxic organics. Evaluation of the land identified for application would include the slope of the land, soil permeability, depth to groundwater, and soil chemistry,prior to the application of sludge. Application rates would require monitoring throughout the period of sludge application operations. An effective record-keeping system would be necessary to assure regulatory agencies that, permit conditions were being met. Once the regulatory system is in place, this sludge management option is readily enforceable. This is due to a complete knowledge of what the sludge consists of, how it is being used, and where it is ultimately placed. Implernentability The public's perception of the utilization of sewage sludge as a soil amendment or fertilizer is influenced greatly by the location of the project. Significant public opposition to the application of sewage sludge has been observed over the past two years. As suburban development encroaches on agricultural lands, the application of sewage sludge will be increasingly difficult to implement. Sludge use in rural settings is a generally accepted practice for operations sensitive to odor control and surface runoff issues. Since a majority of lands in the County are privately owned, the consent and endorsement of private land owners and the farming community at large will be required to utilize most available lands. Capital costs of land .application include vehicles to transport sludge and machinery to apply the sludge (farm equipment or specialized trucks). Operating costs include fuel and maintenance for vehicles and machinery. In addition, field inspectors will be required to regularlyvisit sites where sludge is being landspread, and this cost must be incurred as part of the landspreading program. Necessary steps in establishing a land application program: • Determine suitability of sites within the county with respect to such factors as slope, drainage, soil and crop types, and ease of access. • Meet with county leaders, potential interested users, County Extension agents and Soil Conservation specialists • Conservation specialists to affirm interest and suitability of soil and crop types. The advantages of land application of sewage sludge include: • Satisfies beneficial use priorities • Turns a waste product into a resource for farming and nursery industries • Restores soil texture and tilth, and,increases moisture holding capacity • Slow release nutrient source which reduces negative impacts to water resources Contra Costa County 7- 24 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component • Reduces reliance on agricultural chemicals and petroleum-based fertilizers EVALUATION OF LANDSPREADING Effectiveness: This alternative would be effective in diverting sewage sludge from disposal, dependent upon the availability and soil characteristics of the land. These factors may limit the amount of waste that can be.applied and decrease the amount of waste that can be diverted from landfilling. iHazard: The primary hazards associated with land application pertain to human health, safety, and environmental impacts. As sewage sludge with viable pathogens is being disposed, worker exposure to pathogens is possible. This hazard can be overcome by providing appropriate personal protective equipment and health and safety training. Environmental hazards associated with the landspreading of waste include soil contamination, surface and groundwater pollution, odor, and the uptake of heavy metals or other contaminants into plants or animals that may reach the human food chain. These hazards may affect human health and/or the environment, and it is therefore critical that landspreading programs be adequately planned, operated, and monitored. Ability to Accommodate Change: The ability of this alternative to accommodate change is limited to facility size and the amount of composted sludge that can be stockpiled during unfavorable market conditions. Implementation Period: This alternative could be implemented in the short-term. However, the application of sewage sludge is not an easy to permit activity in California, as the potential for surface and groundwater pollution must be thoroughly evaluated. The permitting of this type of -activity can often take three to four years and thus would be potentially feasible towards the end of the short-term. Facility Requirements: The facilities/equipment needed for landspreading includes land capable of accepting the waste to be spread, special injector-equipped tractors or, tank trucks. For the application of dried sludge, the facilities/equipment needed includes land capable of accepting the waste to be spread,trucks to haul and spread the waste onto the land, and a disc/plow to incorporate the sludge into the soil. In addition, staff would be needed to run the application operation and to maintain equipment, as well as a shelter to house equipment. Consistency With Local Plans and Policies: At present, this alternative does not appear to conflict with current local policies and conditions. Institutional Barriers: This alternative would require the acceptance of local,farmers and farm bureaus. The use of land application as a disposal method is.regulated by,the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In order to conduct a program of this type, the operator of a proposed program must submit a Report of Waste Discharge to the appropriate Regional Board; and. receive Waste Discharge Monitoring and Reporting Requirements: As the process has become more stringent over, the last April 1993 7- 25 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component several years, it may take three to four years to complete the process to conduct a landspreading operation. , Technical, Economic, and Social Flexibility: The land application of sewage sludge does not offer much technical flexibility. The factors that limit this alternative are the loading rate at which sludge can be applied and the availability of land. The loading rate must be evaluated for each soil type that will receive sludge. If land is not available on a long-term basis for land application, the alternative quickly becomes infeasible. These factors do not allow much technical flexibility for this alternative. The land application of sewage sludge has very specific requirements that must be met to satisfy various regulatory agencies. These requirements can result in costs that could be very expensive. In addition, if land becomes more valuable for activities other than the land application of sewage sludge, the economic flexibility of this disposal alternative may be impacted. This alternative thus offers low economic flexibility. This alternative, if not properly implemented and monitored, has the potential for the contamination of surface and groundwater, which is causing it to be more unacceptable statewide. Costs: This alternative could potentially cost several hundred dollars per ton by the time permitting, staff time, soil studies, sludge application, and water quality monitoring program requirements are , completed. 3. Chemical Fixation e Chemical fixation is a new alternative for sludge management. The American N-Viro process won first place in the EPA 1990 beneficial sludge reuse award for technology development. Currently, . American N-Viro Resources, Inc. and the Redwood Landfill in Marin County are working with the East Bay Municipal Utility District on a pilot program to convert sewage sludge into a reusable material. The material may have potential for use as a low grade fertilizer, soil amendment, and/or landfill cover. The process incorporates the use of by-products from the cement industry (cement kiln dust and alkaline by-products)to pasteurize and stabilize sludge pathogens and odors that remain after wastewater treatment. If successful, there could be many advantages for sludge generators and potential users of the fixed material. The potential advantages of this technique are:. • Low technology method of sludge processing which achieves significant pathogen reduction and stabilization • Final product could potentially be substituted for various cover materials in landfill operations , and closure activities, thereby satisfying beneficial use criteria and eliminating the need for expending valuable soil materials Often materials utilized to chemically fix sludge are themselves waste products (i.e., cement kiln dust), thereby resolving,other waste management-problems • Process satisfies EPA's highest standards for pathogen reduction,'making the process suitable for marketing and distribution. Contra Costa County 7- 26 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component EVALUATION OF CHEMICAL FIXATION. ' . Effectiveness: If this process is accepted,by state regulatory agencies and is cost-effective, it could be used to divert most of the sewage sludge currently landfilled. Hazard: The primary hazards associated with the N-Viro process pertain to human health and safety. Workers may be exposed to viable pathogens contained in sewage sludge. This hazard can be overcome by.providing appropriate personal protective equipment and health and safety training. Technical,Economic, and Social Flexibility: As was previously stated, this alternative is relatively new technically. The process is not very complex, and should be readily adaptable to future technical (especially equipment) changes. This alternative appears to offer some economic flexibility to those investing in the process. However, like most new technologies that divert and recycle waste, markets are an important consideration. The $20-40 per ton cost of processing is comparable to the transportation and disposal fees paid for landfilling these wastes. As landfill space becomes more limited and disposal fees increase, on-site treatment and subsequent marketing to partially recover processing costs will be favorably viewed by many treatment facilities. Implementation Period: Implementation of this alternative can be accomplished in the short-term. Facility Requirements: No additional facilities would,be needed. The treatment method can take place at wastewater plants or at landfills. Consistency With Local Plans and Policies: In most cases, this alternative would not conflict with local conditions, including policies, plans, and ordinances. Institutional Barriers: While there are currently no institutional barriers, it is possible that review of the technology by various regulatory agencies may create future permitting or regulatory barriers. Costs: The actual cost to.implement the N-Viro alternative can not be fully addressed at this time. One reason is that the developer of the process has not decided whether it will license the technology to private contractors or if it will provide services directly to clients. According to Mr. David Dickson, President of American N-Viro Resources, the cost to process sewage sludge with a moisture content of 20% will range from $20-40 per wet ton ($100-200 per dry ton). The difference will be dependent upon sludge.volumes and other waste stream characteristics. _This .cost includes materials, equipment amortization, and labor. It does not include land, storage facilities, marketing costs, and/or revenues. E. Programs Selected The County shall encourage the reuse of sewage sludge through any of the three alternative programs described above. Each of the programs is a cost-effective alternative to incineration and disposal. , April 1993 7- 27 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component F. Program Implementation Programs will be implemented at the discretion of the sanitary districts, either in the short-term or medium-term planning period. None of the programs will require a discrete budget for the County. G. Monitoring and Evaluation �. Monitoring and program evaluation will provide the information necessary, to evaluate the success of sewage sludge reuse programs. Evaluation will be accomplished by quarterly reports from sanitary districts. Sanitary districts will be required to report the following information: • Quarterly data on estimated quantities of sewage sludge landfilled, incinerated, composted, land applied, or chemically fixed. • End uses and final destinations for sewage sludge composted, land applied, and chemically fixed. X. SHIPBOARD AND PORT WASTE A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. Encourage reduction of packaging and disposables and use of recyclables on ships to reduce the waste generated. 2. Support monitoring by the Coast Guard and the USDA to ensure that possible hazardous waste is properly disposed of. B. Existing Conditions Overview Several ports and terminals are located in Contra Costa County to receive ships transporting raw materials for refining, primarily petroleum and sugar. Special handling is required for shipboard wastes from ships arriving from outside California. Ships travelling inside State borders do not require special handling of wastes. Non-liquefiable shi board wastes are disposed in tightly sealed containers which are brought to port and deposited into special six cubic yard sealable and lockable containers. These containers are then. transported to licensed facilities which "cook" this material to render it innocuous prior to landfill disposal. Legislation The procedure for disposing of out-of-state shipboard waste is specified by federal and state law (USDA Regulations; California Food and Agriculture Code, Div. 8, Ch. 1, Sect. 16001-16006; Ch. 2, Sect. 1651; Ch. 3, Sect. 16101; Ch. 4, Sect. 16151-16154). USDA approved methods for disposal of shipboard waste include sterilization by heat treatment or fumigation. The Coast Guard enforces the federal regulations, with back-up from the USDA. The California Department of Food and Contra Costa County 7- 28 APril 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component Agriculture is presently working on plans for stricter enforcement of existing codes'on disposal of air and maritime wastes. Current Conditions There is no incinerator or microwave facility for shipboard wastes in Contra Costa County; at present, shipboard wastes requiring special treatment are taken to Integrated Environmental Systems in Oakland for microwave incineration. Contra Costa County has several small ports in the unincorporated area, which produce a minor amount of waste requiring special handling. Of the ports and terminals with out-of-state ships, most do not accept any out-of-state shipboard waste on land, and the terminals generate a minimum of waste, as there is no processing on the sites. Office rubbish is landfilled by various sanitary companies. Some hazardous waste is unloaded from ships, and is dealt with separately, with most of it being transported out of state for incineration. The C and H Sugar Refinery in Crockett receives two vessels per month, and generates approximately 5 cubic yards of shipboard waste per vessel, which is treated as specified above. The plastic waste from the ships (approximately two 33-gallon cans per ship), formerly unloaded in Crockett, is now disposed of in Hawaii, which has less stringent requirements for plastic wastes. The refinery itself generates a variety of wastes: About 10 cubic yards of asbestos per month, which is handled separately by Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal (PHBD). Wood pallets beyond repair and �- dry-rotted dock wood go to the Gaylord woodburning plant. Waste cardboard from packaging and pallets is partially reclaimed or added to the general garbage. Sludge produced by the filtering of the sugar through diatomaceous earth is given primary and secondary treatment at the plant operated in conjunction with the Crockett Valona Sanitary District, and is then landfilled in C and H's private landfill on Cummings Skyway. Non-special worker and .office garbage is compacted on site, collected by PHBD, and landfilled. C. Program Objectives Program objectives for the management of shipboard and port wastes are to reduce the amount of ,plastic and other debris that is hazardous to marine life, and to dispose of shipboard and port waste in an environmentally safe manner. D. Evaluation of Alternatives The current system of collection and disposal is determined to be sufficient to ensure environmentally safe disposal of shipboard and port wastes. However, the County could establish an information program to encourage shipping companies to reduce the amount of shipboard wastes produced, particularly plastics. E. Programs Selected The County shall establish an information program, consisting of direct contacts with shippers, to encourage them to reduce the amount of shipboard wastes produced, particularly plastics. This program will use existing staff, will be of limited duration, and will have no discreet budget. jApril 1993 7- 29 Contra Costa°County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component F. , Program Implementation This program will be implemented during the short-term planning period. i G.' Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and program evaluation will be accomplished through follow-up contacts with shippers to discern any changes in their purchasing patterns and behavior. The responsible staff member will prepare a written report on the program. XI. STREET SWEEPING AND CATCHBASIN DEBRIS A. Summary of Selected Programs The current system of management is determined to be sufficient. B. Existing Conditions In the unincorporated areas of the County, street sweeping is carried out annually by the Maintenance Department, in conjunction With regular maintenance activities. On remote roads without curbs, debris is discharged to the side of the road. In more developed areas, debris is collected, stockpiled, and used for shoulder backings at the sides of the roads during road resurfacing. Excess material . is sent to landfill. Catchbasin cleaning is scheduled seasonally prior to the rainy season. A common method of cleaning catchbasins is to flush them with water and vacuum pump the debris and water into storage tanks. The material is then discharged, and heaped up to reduce its moisture content, and landfilled. All spills are reported to the County Environmental Health Department for determination of possible hazards and designation of the appropriate cleanup method. C. Program Objectives Program objectives for management of street sweeping and catchbasin debris are to utilize these materials to the greatest extent feasible, and to dispose of the remainder in an environmentally safe manner.. D. Evaluation of Alternatives Existing management is sufficient to meet program objectives. No additional programs are ' recommended. Contra Costa County 7- 30 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component . XII. TIRES . A. Summary of Selected Programs 1. Propose legislation that requires tire retailer to display information on durabiltiy and cost per rated mile of tires. 2. Carry out a public information campaign on proper tire maintenance and peak performance inflation to help residents increase the life of tires.. 3. Consider the use of retreaded tires on all County, vehicles, other than those used for high- speed activities. 4. Consider pyrolysis and rubberized asphalt as long-term disposal.methods for used tires. 1 5. Encourage industries that utilize used tires as a feedstock to locate in the Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone. B.. : Existing Conditions Overview Tires present many disposal problems. In.landfills, they resist compaction and tend to rise to the. surface. Discarded tires serve as breeding grounds for vectors such.as mosquitoes. If allowed to pile up in sufficient numbers, tires pose severe fire hazards as well; once ignited, a pile of tires can- burn for months, spewing toxic smoke into the atmosphere and causing oily run-off into nearby surface and ground waters. Tires present many opportunities for recycling; however. They can be retreaded, or,once shredded, incorporated into what is known as rubberized asphalt. Shredding.reduces the volume by a factor of eight. In addition, tires can be reused to form artificial reefs, playground equipment, crash barriers, and erosion control materials, and crumb rubber products such as water-conserving soaker hoses. Legislative Background In 1989, the California Legislature recognized the mounting problem of tire disposal as well as the potential for valuable tire reuse, and passed AB 1843, which provides for the following: As of July 1, 1991, the collection of a $.25 per tire disposal fee on all used tires left with a dealer or other seller. This fee is expected to generate about $7 million annually for the California Tire Recycling Management Fund, to be administered by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. �.. As of July 1, .1991, the issuing of grants to qualified companies and public entities engaged in tire recycling, reuse, recovery, or reduction operations, and research and,development of new tire recycling and shredding technologies. April 1993 7- 31 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component r • A statewide plan to establish shredding operations at designated landfills and solid waste transfer stations. • By July 1, 1991, the California Integrated Waste Management Board is required to develop. regulations dealing with the storage, transportation, and disposal of waste tires; more specifically, to implement regulations for the permitting of major *tire facilities and the authorization of regional landfills for the acceptance and storage of shredded tires. • By December 1, 1991, the Board is required to implement regulations for the permitting of minor tire facilities. • A five percent purchase price preference at the state level for products made from materials derived from used tires'. Current Conditions Until the above regulations go into effect, the existing system for handling waste tires is expected to remain much the same as described in earlier versions of the CoSWMP: Used tire collection will still be largely accomplished by commercial tire haulers collecting retreadable and nonusable casings from service stations, retail stores,-and tire.dealers. Individuals, on the other hand, will either have to trade in old tires and pay the $.25 per tire disposal charge, set them out for collection, or transport them to a disposal site. Presently, all of the County's operating landfills and transfer stations are accepting tires for disposal. However, each one has instituted different conditions for acceptance. Acme Transfer Station in Martinez accepts passenger vehicle and truck tires with rims for $68.90 per cubic yard. Acme will accept bulk deliveries as well, but will not take any off-road tires. This facility does not presently have a shredder on site, but the operator is "thinking about getting one. Af the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill in Richmond, Richmond Sanitary Service formerly had an.agreement_with National Tire.Shredding Co., whereby tires coming into their facility would be shredded. This practice was discontinued last year, though, when the operators determined that it was not proving cost-effective. The site now takes only a few tires at a time, without rims only, and witha maximum size of 40 inches. With the passage of AB 4 and AB 1843, and their emphasis on recycling, market development, and funding, it is likely that shredding tires, as well as other potential reuse methods, will eventually become more cost-effective. Indeed, it will have to, since the disposal of whole tires in California landfills will be prohibited after 1992. ' This provision should be compared with the requirements of AB 4, also passed in 1989, which requires local purchasing agencies, as well as state ones, to give purchase preference to certain recycled products, including tires, over their non-recycled counterparts -- when performance, applicability, andrp ice are equal. Contra Costa County 7- 32 April 1993, Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component C. Program Objectives Program objectives for the management of used tires is to reduce and recycle as much tire waste as is feasible, and to dispose of the remainder in an environmentally safe manner. D. Evaluation of Alternatives Contra Costa County could take any one of several approaches in an effort to reduce the number of tires being disposed of locally. First, through a consumer awareness or public education program, the County could encourage residents to purchase more durable tires, thus requiring less frequent replacement. Reliable statistics regarding performance and wear are available, and could be displayed at the point of purchase to encourage County tire shoppers to compare tires in terms of their initial investment versus their long-term savings. Tire distributors and repair shops would be the most productive targets for such an awareness campaign. Depending on the scope of the program and the timeframe, County, personnel could probably carry out most of the associated tasks without additional staffing. A second source reduction option is for County personnel to carry out a public information campaign on proper tire maintenance and peak performance inflation to help residents increase the life of tires, and to improve vehicle safety. Again, probably no outside assistance would be required for County staff to carry out such a campaign, provided the implementation timeframe and scope were not too ambitious. In terms of reuse, the County should require the use of retreaded tires on all of its vehicles, other than those used for high-speed activities (e.g. Sheriff's Department cars). This practice would save money, and if advertised, send a positive message to residents about the value of retreaded tires. As with the two source reduction programs above, County staff could probably perform all of the necessary duties for this recycling effort during the short-term planning period. For the medium-term planning period, the County should consider, pyrolysis and rubberized asphalt as additional program options. An Oregon firm is one of the country's leaders in pyrolysis technology, and could provide a viable market for the County's used tires. County staff should start researching this and other similar enterprises now to assess their potential value as destinations for some of the County's discarded tires. As for rubberized asphalt, whereby crumb rubber (one-inch pieces of old tires) is incorporated into paving materials, the .California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) has been a long- standing leader in exploring and promoting tire reuse technologies. The Department has undertaken over a dozen tire reuse projects throughout the state, most of which have demonstrated real promise. While the technologies are not yet cost-effective for all situations, CalTrans, under pressure from the Integrated Waste Management Board and California's local governments,may eventually provide another ready market. Here again, County staff should stay informed about the progress of CalTrans projects, and build future tire recycling programs around successful ventures. While the County may eventually need assistance to implement these medium- and long-term tire recycling programs, • existing staff should be laying the groundwork over the next few years. April 1993 7- 33 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE .Special Waste Component 1 Finally, industries that use tires as a feedstock for the manufacture of new products,such as soaker hose, freeway barriers, etc., could be encouraged to establish production facilities in the County. E. Programs Selected 1. The County shall propose legislation that requires all retailers of tires to display information on the durability and cost per rated mile of tires. 2. The County's public education program shall include a campaign to educate the public regarding the benefits of proper tire inflation, and the economics of buying more durable tires (see the EPI component). 3. The County shall maximize the use of retreaded tires for all non-emergency vehicles as existing tire stocks are depleted. 4. County staff will investigate markets for tire pyrolysis and rubberized asphalt production. 5. Industries that utilize used tires as feedstock will be actively solicited to locate facilities in the Shoreline Recycling Market Development Zone (see Appendix D). F. Program Implementation All programs will be implemented in the short-term planning period, using existing staff. None.of the programs will require a discrete budget. G. Monitoring and Evaluation r Since there is no accurate count of the total number of used tires generated in the unincorporated areas, accurate monitoring and evaluation of programs will be difficult. The use of retreaded tires on County vehicles is simple to track through purchase orders. 1 Contra Costa County 7- 34 April 1993 final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component �' x a � o` AA A A A A A A A A A A A A u< . al �. .� Q o CA H °> to on tw ou o4 ao a c� c a c u en W O to O O Qui G' O M m O t} Q C4 0. •` O� r'" u 0 O • r� a� a� a w s a d u ° x x a •- e A A rx W U A U _ 0 U U U U U U U O A d 1 3 � � g. a E-4 U a E V y y 0a0 Loa 0o oE- o cn n. Uto n CLO ¢ `.. aAo Q > o a3 y 1 C7 W a oo 3 a Q a A CI - w s. A U April 1993 7- 35 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component i •v a� 0 a a 0 U o 0 0 o 2 > Q o A o 0 x Q x A x x y 0 0 a $° U � o -go a o v o U P4 v3 r a a. M en o � U w rn 0 8 00 $ o W cn cn O O • a N F O\ O\ � 'M .a oq E c� y Cn ti R d Q A H a v OQ 5 y ✓ Q � � Q' Q V .n U . O C7 p4 A U A AU 0 A A y 0 .ar 0 ��+� .4 ,�. •G > '' O Y ° N N O C O O A 3 � U o `o C� Ln E y Vl W yr a �•in .a U O •~ C� it > .•� a �� o - U Contra Costa County 7- 36 APril 1993 Final Draft SRRE Special Waste Component N EDUCATION AND ' PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT rTABLE OF CONTENTS r . PAGE r INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. EXISITING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ' II. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A. Short-term Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 B. Medium-term Objectives 3 r III. EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PROGRAMS ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. Franchised Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. County-Run Programs 4 IV. MONITORING AND EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 A. Monitoring and Evaluation of Service Providers' EPI Efforts . . 7 B. Monitoring and Evaluation of County-Run Programs 7 V. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 7 VI. FUNDING AND STAFFING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1 1 r TABLE OF LISTS r PAGE r Table 8-1: Implementation Schedule for EPI Programs . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Table 8-2: Funding and Staffing Requirements for County EPI Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 r 1 i 1 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT i INTRODUCTION Public information and education are essential in building an effective partnership between consumers, government, and the solid waste and recycling industries. An effective partnership is required for success in conserving natural resources and landfill capacity. Public information is critical in developing support for and participation in the programs selected to reduce waste disposal by 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The public information and education program outlined in this section provides flexibility in targeting different diversion programs, different segments of our population, and specific materials. This flexibility will allow changes in emphasis and methods of communication which may be necessary to assure reaching the planned diversion goals. Diversion and disposal services, and processing and disposal facilities are handled by private sector businesses or non-profit organizations in Contra Costa County. These entities provide services which overlap the jurisdictional boundaries of the County and cities. Where mutual cooperation can provide timely and cost-effective public information and education as well as program implementation, the County will seek to coordinate activities with the private sector businesses, non- profit organizations, and other public agencies. The County will, however, continue to conduct public information and education programs itself, when this is cost-effective and appropriate. This Public Information and Education Component covers: L Existing Conditions H. Goals and Objectives III. Evaluation and Selection of Programs IV. Monitoring and Evaluation V. Implementation Schedule ' VI. Funding and Staffing Requirements April 1993 8- 1 Contra Costa County Final Drag SRRE Education & Public Information Component I. EXISITING CONDITIONS County public information and education efforts, over the past several years, have included: • preparation, purchase, and distribution to cities, libraries, community groups, and individuals of the "Contra Costa Waste Reduction and Recycling Guide;" a • establishment of a comprehensive, county-wide hotline service to handle calls from the public regarding services available throughout the county; a • assisting the Contra Costa Council in preparing and distributing its "Waste Management and Recycling Guidebook for Business;" D • preparation and showings before community groups of a video on landfills entitled "The Contra Costa Solution;" a • preparation and distribution of a K-4 curriculum on recycling; • implementation of the County's Schools Recycling Program; a • preparation and showings of a training video on the Schools Recycling Program; and • implementation of an annual Recycling Awards Program. II. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The goals for the Public Information and Education Program are: 1. Increase the public's awareness of environmental and solid waste issues. e 2. Increase participation in existing and new source reduction, recycling, and composting programs. a 3. Encourage residents and businesses to increase their use of recycled, recyclable, reused, and reusable goods. A. Short-term Objectives: 1. Expand existing public education and information programs to address source reduction, composting and recycling tailored to local residential, commercial, and industrial areas throughout the unincorporated County. 2. Cultivate support for diversion programs within the business community. 3. Work with other public agencies and with private sector service providers to coordinate countywide and subregional public education efforts. Contra Costa Counry 8- 2 April 1993 Final Drag?SRRE Education,& Public Infonnation Component ' 4. The numerical objectives for the short-term are as follows: achieve 70% participation rate among targeted residential populations for curbside recycling and composting programs; achieve a measurable level of residential source reduction; achieve 50% participation in commercial and industrial collection programs within targeted areas. B. Medium-term Objectives: Medium-term objectives should build upon short-term objectives and focus upon: 1. Expansion of short term programs. 2. Revision and improvement of short term programs based on feedback obtained from monitoring and evaluating these programs. 3. Development of new programs to target specific subpopulations or wastestrea ms. 4. The numerical objectives for the medium-term are as follows: achieve 80% participation rate among targeted residential populations for curbside recycling and composting programs; double the short-term level of measurable source reduction in the residential sector; achieve 70% participation in commercial and industrial collection programs within targeted areas. III. EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PROGRAMS The County's public education and information program will consist of two main segments: ' • directing and monitoring efforts through franchised service providers of recycling, source reduction, and composting services; • directly conducting public education and information efforts through the Community Development Department. ' A. Franchised Service Providers As the County implements its policy to establish franchises or MOU's in the unincorporated areas, the County will effectively take greater control over the provision of diversion and hauling services to the unincorporated areas of the County. Because the unincorporated communities are diverse and widespread, and because of the many service providers currently operating throughout the unincorporated areas, the County will, to a large extent, rely upon the franchised service providers to provide information to the residents and businesses they serve regarding new, expanded, and ongoing diversion services. The County will ensure a minimum level of information dissemination through explicit clauses in franchise agreements and MOU's. As a rule, each provider of diversion services (including haulers using variable can rates) in the unincorporated area will be required to provide the following information: 1. Notice of program start-up for each new service, or significant revision of service. This notice may take the form,of a targeted mailing, door-hanger, or distribution of containers April 1993 8-3 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Information Component with attached fliers. Notices must be delivered to each eligible-household or business. In the case of businesses,this may be done through telephone contacts. Printed notices should be multi-lingual where significant non-english speaking populations exist, and should contain comprehensive information regarding the new service, including the phone number of the service provider and the County hotline. 2. Periodic reminders. Printed reminders must be distributed at least once every year that a a recycling, composting, or source reduction program operates. Notices may contain information about more than one program. Reminders should include the same basic information as the initial notices, i.e., a description of the .service, which materials are accepted and which are not, day of pick-up, etc. In addition, reminders should be directed at correcting any problems noted in the program, such as excessive levels of contamination. 3. Mass media. Service providers will be required to conduct an annual mass media program. Service providers may use newspaper, television, or radio. These must be produced spots or advertisements, not merely announcer-read public service announcements. Service providers must demonstrate to the County that the mass media campaign will reach a significant portion of the intended audience, and that the spots target particular goals or n deficiencies in their services. Service providers may combine resources together, or with D public agencies or regional JPA,s, to reach broader populations with general messages. 4. Information services. Although the County provides hotline services for all areas of the County, service providers should be prepared to respond to inquiries from the public regarding their services, and to refer callers to the County hotline for inquiries out of their scope of service. Service providers should also make available printed literature at their offices, and mail materials to the public upon request. Service providers will be required to seek approval from the Community Development Department a before final production and dissemination of an informational piece. •In addition, Service providers will report annually to the Community Development Department on their public information efforts. The Community Development Department will allocate staff resources to assisting the franchised service providers in designing, developing, and monitoring their public information campaigns. D B. County-Run Programs In addition to overseeing and coordinating the public information campaigns of the franchised service providers, the Community Development Department will continue to operate several public information and educational programs. The purpose of these programs will be to inform and educate the public regarding source reduction and other programs that are not franchised; to serve as a comprehensive source of information on programs operating throughout the county; to coordinate .with other public agencies for the development of subregional and county-wide promotional campaigns; and to work with community groups and business organizations to instill a source reduction and recycling ethic in the populace and in commerce. Contra Costa County 8- 4 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Information Component The Community Development Department will operate the following programs in the short-term planning period. At the end of the short-term planning period, these programs will be reevaluated and decisions made to continue, revise, or terminate them. 1. Contra Costa County Waste Reduction and Recycling Guide ' The Community Development Department has already prepared and disseminated two editions of this comprehensive guide to source reduction, recycling, and composting in the county. The Community Development Department will continue to update and distribute the guide at approximately one year intervals. This program requires both staff resources for updating the guide, and a budget for production and distribution. 2. County Hotline (Update) �! In 1992, the Community Development Department instituted a hotline service to provide information to residents and businesses throughout the county regarding source reduction, recycling, and composting programs, special events, and services. The hotline utilizes an on-line data base that is constantly updated (and which serves as the database for production of the Waste Reduction and Recycling Guide) and is staffed during regular business hours. This program requires ongoing expenditures for staff time to update the data base and to handle in-coming calls. 3. Resource Evaluations This program is detailed in the Source Reduction Component. The Community Development Department will coordinate the Resource Evaluation Program, and will publicize the program to businesses. The Hotline operator will direct calls regarding waste audits to the appropriate staff member, and will make available upon request self-evaluation guides and other written materials. Promotional materials will include information on the- Business License fee reduction program and the vocational training program. 4. Schools Program The Community Development Department has, since 1991, operated an outreach program to school districts, providing them with a recycling curriculum and information on setting up ' internal recycling programs. This program will be expanded to all interested school districts. In addition, the Community Development Department .will develop a training video to accompany the curriculum, and will directly train teachers in using the curriculum. Community Development Department staff will be available,to make presentations in classrooms on various aspects of waste management. This program will .require the . allocation of staff resources, as well as a budget to produce the training video, and to develop and distribute written materials. 5. Disposable Diapers This program is detailed, including staffing and budget requirements, in the Source Reduction Component. April 1993 8- 5 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Information Component . 6. Vocational Training Program (See Source Reduction Component) The Community Development Department will work with community colleges to develop a certificate program in recycling/re-use business administration and skill development. The program should include general business courses, as well as newly developed courses on repair and refurbishing of household items, and materials processing and marketing. The curriculum should include an internship program, and should be coordinated with local reuse and recycling organizations and businesses. This program will require the allocation of staff time, and likely a grant to a community college for program start-up and perhaps for ongoing costs. 7. Speakers Bureau The Community Development Department will organize a speakers bureau, and collect and prepare informational media for presentation to community groups and homeowners associations in the unincorporated areas. Speakers might include both Community Development Department staff, and representatives of local businesses and organizations involved in any aspect of integrated waste management. Community Development Department staff will conduct an ongoing outreach campaign to schedule speaking engagements throughout the unincorporated areas. Speakers will be provided with appropriate materials. Non-County staff speakers will be given a small honorarium. This program will require allocation of staff time, and a budget for materials development and for honoraria. 8. Tires Source Reduction (See also the Special Waste Component) The Community Development Department will conduct a mass media and targeted media a' campaign to inform the public regarding the source reduction, economic, and safety benefits of proper tire inflation, wheel balancing and alignment, and buying more durable tires. The Community Development Department will prepare a written piece on tire source reduction, a that will be sent on request to individuals. A variation of the piece will be prepared as a tear-off display and distributed to tire dealers throughout the county. The mass media campaign will consist of radio public service announcements reminding people of the benefits of tire longevity. This program will require allocation of staff time to prepare written pieces and PSA's, and to compile a list of tire dealers and to send the tear-off display to them. This program will also require a budget for printing and mailing, and for production and distribution of the PSA's.c 9. Organic Materials Source Reduction Information and Outreach This program is detailed in the Source Reduction Component: 10. Promotion of Drop-off and Buy-back Facilities The Community Development Department will conduct a program informing residents of new and existing drop-off and buy-back centers as these become operational. The program may consist of separate notices to households, or may be piggybacked onto informational pieces Contra Costa Counry 8- 6 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Information Component distributed by franchised service providers. This program will require staff time and a budget to produce and distribute materials. IV. MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring and evaluation of selected programs will, like the programs themselves, be divided into two main components, one focused on compliance of franchised service providers with the terms of their contracts or agreements; the other focused on the programs being run by the County itself. The overall measure of success for the EPI programs will be progress toward achieving the goals and objectives set out at the.beginning of the. chapter. ' A. Monitoring and Evaluation of Service Providers' EPI Efforts Each franchise agreement, memorandum of understanding, or contract for services for diversion programs in unincorporated communities should include express provisions requiring the service provider to track participation rates. These agreements should also require service providers to. correlate changes in participation rates with informational programs, such as mailings and mass media campaigns. Service providers should provide figures that graphically represent changes in participation. Such a graph may, for example, indicate.average weekly set out, by month,.with indications of when public education and information programs were in effect. Deficiencies in service providers' EPI programs should be addressed by assisting them in identifying problems with service or effectiveness of the EPI programs, and coming up with strategies for correcting these problems. B. Monitoring.and Evaluation of County-Run Programs Monitoring and evaluation of County-run programs will be largely a matter of internal review. Staff responsible for individual programs will make annual or semi-annual reports detailing the goals and objectives of the program, progress toward meeting these goals and objectives, suggestions for revising or improving the program, and an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the program. Where quantitative data can be obtained easily, e.g., the number of calls coming into the hotline, staff will include such in their reports. Each year, the Community Development Department will evaluate the overall performance of its EPI programs, and make decisions on changes and emphasis for the coming year. V. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE The following table indicates implementation tasks and dates for all selected programs. All programs will be the responsibility of the Community Development Department. i r April 1993 8- 7 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Information Component Table 8-1: Implementation Schedule for EPI Programs Fro"r; trrn ' ' .................................:...::.:.........:.................................:.Tm :Frrne.....::.:::::: :::::.::::::::::::._::::::.::::.:::::.............:........... 1. Contra Costa County Waste Reduction and Recycling Guide a Revise Guide Approximately annually, starting late 1993 2. County Hotline Update and staff hotline ongoing 3. Resource Evaluations Q See Source Reduction Component 4. Schools Program 8 Prepare training video Summer 1993 Continue outreach to schools Ongoing 5. Disposable Diapers See Source Reduction Component 6. Vocational Training Program (See Source Reduction Component) 7. Speakers Bureau Recruit and organize speakers Fall 1993 Prepare informational media Fall 1993-spring 1994 Schedule speakers Beginning Fall 1993, ongoing 8. Tires Source Reduction (See also the Special Waste Component) Prepare written pieces on tire source Summer 1993 reduction Prepare PSA's Summer 1993 Program Evaluation Winter-Summer 1994 9. Organic Materials Source Reduction Information and Outreach See Source Reduction Component 10. Promotion of Drop-off and Buy-back Facilities Prepare and distribute informational pieces As new facilities come on line on new facilities Oversight and Coordination of Franchisees' EPI Campaigns Oversight and coordination Ongoing Contra Costa County 8- 8 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Education & Public Infonnation Component r VI. FUNDING AND STAFFING REQUIREMENTS The following table includes estimates of program costs, including staffing requirements and budgetary requirements for materials, media time, etc. Dollar amounts do not include funding requirements for staff. Estimates of staff requirements include monitoring and evaluation staffing requirements. Table 8-2: Funding and Staffing Requirements for County EPI Programs Program Staff Materials and Other Budgetary Requirements Requirements (start-up and (FTE's) annual costs shown separately) 1. Contra Costa County Waste Reduction and .1 $10,000/year ' Recycling Guide 2. County Hotline 1 $5,000/year ' 3. Resource Evaluations (outreach and 1 $10,000 Start-up; promotion only) $2,000/year 4. Schools Program .2 $10,000 Start-up; $2,000/year 5. Disposable Diapers see Source Red. ' 6. Vocational Training Program .2 $10,000460,000 start-up; $0-$60,000/year 7. Speakers Bureau 1 $4,000/year 8. Tires Source Reduction(See also the 1 $10,000/year Special Waste Component) ' 9. Organic Materials Source Reduction See Source Red. Information and Outreach 10. Promotion of Drop-off and Buy-back .05 $3,000/year ' Facilities Oversight and Coordination of Franchisee's .15 -- EPI Efforts STotal: 2.0 $30,000480,000 start-up; $36,000-$96,000 per year Revenues and Revenue Sources None of the programs are expected to generate any revenues. Funding sources for EPI programs will come from two sources: for franchised programs, funding will come from the ratepayers, and ' will be considered a part of the cost of services provided; for County-run programs, funds will come from the Resource Recovery Fee, which derives from landfill tipping fee charges. These funding sources hold true both for program costs, and for monitoring and evaluation costs. ' April 1993 8-9 Contra Costa County Final Drafi SRRE / , Education & Public Information Component t t i ' i��G CONIY��N' TABLE OF CONTENTS ' PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. DIVERSION PROGRAM COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III. FUNDING MECHANISMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IV. CONTINGENCY FUNDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ' TABLE OF LISTS PAGE ' Table 9-1: Summary of Program Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r FUNDING COMPONENT ' I. INTRODUCTION AB 939 requires an approach to solid waste management which links waste collection, diversion and recovery programs, and facilities into a functionally-integrated system. Such linkage is aimed at providing an understanding of the relationship of the various aspects of the solid waste system to ' each other and of the various costs associated with solid waste generation, collection, diversion and disposal. ' In California, waste collection and disposal fees have been quite inexpensive compared to those in other metropolitan areas of the United States. However, increasing stringent landfill design standards, increasing transportation and collection costs, and desreasing availabiltiy of landfill capacity, hav resulted in significantly increased costs in the past few years. Operation and capital costs for solid waste facilities have significantly increased with stricter regulatory requirements. Health and safety considerations have also increased facility siting and permitting costs, along with the costs for more stringent standards for facility design, operation, and closure. Additional costs result from diversion and materials recovery programs which are intended ' to prolong the life of landfills as well as conserve natural resources. Waste collection and disposal costs in California, insofar as these reflect the entire solid waste management system, can no longer be expected to remain-low. This component summarizes the costs for the diversion programs selected, the funding mechanisms which will be used for the diversion programs, and contingency funding for the'programs. Program- specific funding is detailed in the program components. Existing and proposed landfills and MFSWF s operated by either private sector businesses or other governmental agencies within Contra Costa County. Consequently, capital and operations costs for ' these facilities are not covered in this SRRE but rather in the project applications and environmental documents for each of the facilities. Additionally, waste collection costs for curbside collection programs, including those selected for implementation in this SRRE, are based upon the service fees of private sector waste haulers. The County has enacted a Franchising Ordinance, but until further implementation of this ordinance occurs curbside collection costs for the specific materials targeted by the County wil not be available. Table 9-1 shows the waste collection costs, including curbside recycling, for the unincorporated areas as of January, 1991. As noted in the Recycling Component, waste collection costs for the proposed curbside recycling programs can be expected to increase by $1.25 - $2.25 per household per month within the short-term planning period. April 1993 9- 1 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Funding Component a I1. DIVERSION PROGRAM COSTS The programs selected in this SRRE will cumulatively cost an estimated $921,000 for start-up costs for public sector expenditures, including the costs of capitalizing facilities and new programs. Ongoing costs will be approximately $750,000 per year. These figures, which include funding requirements for County staff, are planning level estimates; actual costs are expected to be within 20%. These figures do not include the costs of capitalizing and operating MFSWF's or selected recycling and composting collection and processing programs, hich are expected to be covered by the private sector and the ratepayers. Table 9-1: Summary of Program Costs Pxogram Start up Annual - Staffing ST MT;;..;.:.. Costs ($) < Costs Diversion piversion Source Reduction 244,600 196,000 3.25 3.9 8.9 Recycling 621,450 419,200 2.0 15.5 32 a Composting 0 54,000 .2 6.2 13.1 Special Waste - 0 9,600 .2 0 0 Education and Public Info. 55,000 162,000 2.0 0 0 TOTAL 920;959 786;854 7 65 25 60 54U III. FUNDING MECHANISMS Funding for the diversion programs will come from two primary sources: the AB 939 Tipping Fee, a and the Resource Recovery Fees required as part of the Land Use Permit Conditions of Approval for the ACME Transfer Station and the Marsh Canyon and Keller Canyon Landfills. . 8 The County's portion of the AB 939 Tipping Fee is $.15 per ton which results in a revenue of $150,000 per year for implementation of the diversion programs and for monitoring and evaluation of those programs. The Resource Recovery Fees provide additional revenue. These fees were imposed, and became effective, when the Land Use Permit approvals were given for the Transfer Station and new landfills. The fees are specifically designated to fund County-run activities aimed at conserving landfill capacity for all county jurisdictions and residents. In that the two new landfills will provide disposal for all jurisdictions and all residents, programs which conserve capacity serve all jurisdictions and residents; the costs for such programs is a shared cost for shared disposal capacity. Contra Costa County 9- 2 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Funding Component ' The Resource Recovery Fee was levied as a pass-through business cost incurred"by the operators. 1 If the operators of the new landfills or of the ACME Transfer Station/Material Recovery Facility pass these costs on, the impact could be calculated as a little less than $1.00 per year per person living in Contra Costa County. 1 A third revenue source will be sale of materials from the planned buy-back and drop-off facilities. These facilities are'expected to generate revenues approximately equal to their operating costs, i.e., 1 approximately $250,000 per year. Because of the instability of commodities markets, and uncertain volume of materials that will be handled, the actual revenues are uncertain. All revenues from sale of materials will be used either for the operation of the facilities, or for other County programs. 1 In that full implementation of all diversion programs will be phased in over the short- and medium- terms, the revenues from the County's portion of the AB 939 Tipping Fee, from the Resource 1 Recovery Fees, and from the sale of materials should fully cover program costs. 1 IV. CONTINGENCY FUNDING As part of the County's-Secondary Materials Market Development Program, financing will be 1 developed to assist in implementing source reduction and recycling programs. Additionally, grants and public-private partnerships in financing will be developed, as part of the Market Development Program, to provide funding for start-up, equipment, and public information activities for such 1 businesses. 1 1 I, • i . 1 . r, April 1993 9-3 Contra Costa County I' Final Dra•ft SRRE 1 � Funding Component i. is e ' INTEGRATION COMPONENT ' I I i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. GENERAL POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. INTEGRATION OF COMPONENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III. ACHIEVEMENT OF MANDATED DIVERSION GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IV. CONTINGENCIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ' LIST OF TABLES PAGE i Table 10-1: Diversion'Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 INTEGRATION COMPONENT I. GENERAL POLICIES AB 939 proposed a partnership between the State, counties, cities, individual and business consumers, and the solid waste and recycling industries in integrating waste collection and disposal with source reduction, recycling, composting, and other diversion programs. Faced with limited landfill disposal capacity, in 1989 the County and a majority of the 18 cities within Contra Costa ' County adopted the County Solid Waste Management Plan (CoSWMP). The CoSWMP recognized the need to coordinate diversion and source reduction programs with waste collection and waste disposal facilities. In carrying out the goals and policies outlined in the 1989 CoSWMP, the Board ' of Supervisors approved two new landfills and a multi-functional solid waste facilities (MFSWF'S) for the Central County area, and began cooperative efforts with West County and East County cities for two additional MFSWF's for those geographic sub-legions. Additionally, the Board imposed diversion requirements of 25% by the year 1995 and 50% by the year 2000 on each of the new landfills. ' To begin meeting these locally-mandated diversions and conserve the limited existing landfill capacity, the County and 18 cities implemented recycling programs. The Board also began development of source reduction programs including establishing a Plastics Task Force and a ' Compost Task Force to assist in identifying source reduction and diversion programs for these materials. Additionally, the Board has initiated action to further limit disposal of materials in the new landfills by requiring diversion programs for plastics, paper, tin, aluminum, yard waste, wood waste, cardboard, metals, white _goods, and construction/demolition debris. Development of markets for ' secondary materials was included in the work of the Plastics and Compost Task Forces. Market development for secondary materials is recognized as a critical program to assure the economic viability for recycling and source reduction activities. ' The programs selected for implementation in this SRRE augment those already initiated by the Board of Supervisors. Implementation of the programs and public information activities will be ' coordinated, when feasible, with the cities within the geographic sub-regions of the County and with the programs proposed by the transfer stations/material recovery facilities located in West County, Central County, and East County. However, where implementation delays could retard attainment ' of the diversion goals, the County will maintain the implementation schedule for the specific diversion programs outlined in Table 10-1. April 1993 10- 1 Contra Costa County ' Final Draft SRRE Integration Component II. INTEGRATION OF COMPONENTS As noted in the Introduction to this document, a variety of recycling, composting, public information, ' and market development activities will be implemented in the short-term. While some source reduction programs will also be implemented, emphasis is placed on the development of source ' reduction programs which can effect changes in consumer practices in order to conserve our natural resources as well as our landfills. _ In the medium-term, as diversion rates reach significant levels and the pressure on the county's landfills eases, more emphasis will be placed on developing source reduction programs as a long-term solution. ' The. programs selected in the Source Reduction, Recycling, Composting, Special Waste, and Education and Public Information Components are designed to complement one another, and to work ' together toward achievement of this plan's goals and objectives. There is little conflict between components in targeting materials. Most diversion is expected from recycling and composting,which target differing materials almost without exception. There are some conflicts between source ' reduction programs and other programs, however. Where these occur, source reduction, as the highest priority management method, should take precedence. For example, organic materials are targeted both for organic waste source reduction (point-of-generation composting) and for centralized ' composting. In accordance with the hierarchy of waste management practices, organic waste source reduction is considered the preferable treatment, and residents and businesses will be encouraged to perform as much of their own organic waste source reduction as possible. The centralized ' composting system should be designed to handle those materials not managed at the point of generation. Education and public information is the glue that binds all of the components together into an ' integrated whole. The Education and Public Information Component is a counterpart for the selected programs from all components. A well-coordinated education and public information effort is ' essential to ensure that preferable methods of waste management are emphasized, and that residents and businesses have the informational resources necessary to participate in diversion programs. An effort that merely informs people of new programs is insufficient for implementing this plan; what ' is needed is a beacon that broadcasts the philosophy and practice of integrated waste management. III. ACHIEVEMENT OF MANDATED DIVERSION GOALS Table 11-1 indicates how much diversion can be expected from each selected program. These ' projections are derived from estimating capture rates for materials targeted in each selected program. Figures appearing in the table indicate the first full year of operation of programs. Diversion rates ' can be expected to remain steady, or increase over time. The subtotal and total rows in the table show the cumulative diversion. The table indicates that the mandated 25% goal will be achieved in 1994. The 50% goal will be reached in 1997 or 1998. ' Table 10-1 indicates that by the beginning of 1995, the County will have achieved a diversion rate of 31.5%, well above the mandated short-term objective of 25%. This will be achieved through ' 3.86% source reduction, 20.83% recycling, and 6.81% composting. By the beginning of the year 2000, the County will have achieved a diversion rate of 66.09%, well above the mandated goal, and Contra Costa County 10- 2 April 1993 ' Final Draft SRRE Integration Component ' this plan's medium-term objective, of 50%. This will be achieved through 8.96% source reduction, 37.22% recycling, and 19.91% composting. ' IV. CONTINGENCIES ' If the goals and objectives of any component are not met, the County shall consider the following contingency measures: 1. Evaluate program performance, identify and target shortcomings to bring program performance up to projected levels. ' 2. Evaluate staffing, public education, and public participation in programs, identify any inadequacies and devise remedies. ' 3. If programs continue to operate at unacceptably low levels, consider the following: a. redesign the program to correct apparent deficiencies; b. replace the program with another program option, either a program identified as an option in this element but not selected, or ' another option not considered here; c. consider expanding the programs of another component to replace poorly performing programs,-e.g., expanding composting in lieu of recycling. 1 April 1993 10- 3 Contra Costa County Final Draft SRRE ' Integration Component . ......... g ' 0 N O� O\ .,. ., 00 i " M O\ N O o0 ' [\ U ........a ON '.. XX kn S N �n et ,N v� cn H o ....: O\ O MMy A O� ti CHC h G g� tom•. ao. r ct a o � ej a r' 0 v� o F" o �a n• ' G vpi � E cn a0i F o a a� E o0 aG a a� a C F" p _ Q w w ; U cn0 � C/3 � 3po � U3 „ � � � x .� ,,� 00 t. N O p:. •x N O N C �. qJ O N:: a v1 w 1340 > O tx E- ch- 1:4 w tx I= A rx U A U E- a Contra Costa County , 10- 4 April 1993 Final Draft SRRE Integration Component ' ........... :: . �: O o O\ •" O O O N.; C\ / NO. cli to �0 6� Z9 UR el tR e 8� � N NN O O O M N ' tr c, S O: r rn ::=i kn rn �n tp .. s' .� .. O N N 5 C\ I c\ NO. In ~ O'> O\ bR r. AO In H:WS A. -o ::;;::: O a ao... O 4) y k o U0 w <.S o aoi Q o a rx W A 04U A U .E-.:'rx': U w v) April 1993 10- 5 Contra Costa County ' Final Draft SRRE Integration Component