2/5/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

study performed by Camp Dresser and McKee Inc. The study was to identify the currently existing recycling efforts and their suc- cess, and evaluate the various recycling -alternatives to deter- mine the best approach for accomplishing the 30% recycling man- date. To meet the requirements for implementing a recycling program the District began by manning the currently existing waste collection centers and providing for the segregation and recycling of the following items: 1. Newspaper 5. Aluminum Cans 2. Waste Oil 6. Metal Cans 3. Yard Trash 7. Plastics 4. White Goods/Metals 8. Cardboard As noted in a previous memorandum (Exhibit I), which provides an analysis of the counties current recycling program from March -Oc- tober 1990, the drop off centers, although appearing successful, are not even closely meeting the recycling requirements of the State. The memo illustrates that the District is recycling ap- proximately 10.63% and the private sector is recycling approxi- mately 2.86%. Although these figures look very good for this stage of our recycling,program a problem lies in the fact that a maximum of 15% of the material recycled can consist of yard trash and white goods. The remaining 15% must consist of glass, paper, aluminum, etc. Of the overall 13.49% of the wastestream recycled 10.06% was attributed to yard trash and white goods, while only 3.39% was attributed to other materials. Of that 3.39% the pri- vate sector is recycling 2.86% and the current collection center program is credited for recycling 0.58%. This analysis reflects 8 -months of operations, however, it closely relates to the analy- ses provided in the engineers evaluation and recommendation on implementing a recycling program. In the engineering evaluation it was anticipated that the drop-off collection program would re- cycle 1% at this stage of the program, and eventually peak at 3%. It was also estimated that the private sector was recycling ap- proximately 3% and our analysis documented 2.86%. It was further estimated that the current program would, at a maximum, reach ,10-12% and we have been able to reach 13.49% due to the success of our white goods and yard trash recycling. The engineers indicated that a mandatory collection program with source separation and curbside recycling would provide the most successful long-term program that would best accomplish the over- all 30% recycling requirement. ANALYSIS Based upon the analysis of the current program and information from the engineering study and nation-wide studies on recycling, staff believes that a curbside collection and recycling program is essential to accomplish the recycling of 30% of the wastes- tream. It would also be of extreme value in accomplishing the mandated separation of yard trash from the wastestream by January 1,1992. Of further value is the provision by the collectors of curbside collection of white goods and furniture. This type of material, as well as yard trash, is what is commonly dumped.ille- gally even though the free disposal of these items is available at our collection centers. District staff has drafted an ordinance for adoption of a manda- tory collection program and a recycling program. The ordinance also includes more detailed permitting requirements for the man- agement of solid waste, and particularly hazardous and biohazar- dous wastes. RECOMMENDATIONS District staff is presenting the attached draft ordinance before the Board for review. It is recommended that the Board provide comment or recommendations, then establish •a date for public hearing and subsequent adoption of the ordinance. r� 51 PUb� ��