Focused Workshop on the Informal Draft Revised Disposal Reporting System Regulations Session #1 March 2003

2 Workshop Agenda Introduction and System Overview Scales and Weighing Requirements Thresholds for Scales Alternatives to Weighing Determining Origin and Tracking Tonnages Surveys Allocation of Multi-Jurisdictional Loads Self-Haul Hauler Records Tracking Categories

3 Workshop Purpose Provide clarification on definitions and Disposal Reporting System (DRS) Obtain input on specific sub-topics of the DRS regulations: Focus on solutions Discuss alternatives already submitted Consider additional alternatives to implement Board-approved SB 2202 recommendations

4 Definition Clarifications and System Overview

5 Hauler Categories Commercial Hauler: Person whose primary business involves collection and hauling of waste Includes franchised or contracted haulers Commercial Self-hauler: Person who generates waste as a result of his/her business and who hauls the waste to a solid waste facility Includes roofers and contractors

6 Hauler Categories Residential Self-hauler: Person who hauls waste to a solid waste facility Includes homeowners with “small” loads of self-hauled waste

7 Hauler Categories (continued) 1st informal draft also referred to: Residential Self-Hauler as Self-Haulers delivering waste in passenger and pickup trucks as defined in sections 465 and 471 of the Vehicle Code Commercial Self-Hauler as Self-Haulers except those delivering waste in passenger vehicles and pickup trucks as defined in sections 465 and 471 of the Vehicle Code

8 Hauler Categories (continued) Alternative suggested by stakeholders for Self-haul Definitions: Rather than defining self-haul loads in terms of commercial self-hauler or residential self-hauler (pickup and car loads), define loads in terms of volume: “Large” = loads greater than or equal to 6 cubic yards, and “Small” = loads less than 6 cubic yards.

9 Daily Tracking vs. Quarterly Reporting Daily tracking means determining the origin and tonnage of each load every day of facility operation and maintaining records for audits. Quarterly reporting means compiling the origin and tonnage data gathered through daily tracking during the quarter and reporting the quarterly totals allocated to each jurisdiction. Model Reporting Forms assist in summarizing required quarterly data and use would be optional for agencies/facilities/haulers.

10

11 Scales and Weighing

12 Tons Per Day Threshold Concern with existing system: Tonnage data may not be accurate, since many facilities do not have scales. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require scales and weighing of all loads at facilities above a certain tonnage per day. Allow exemptions for rural facilities. Clarification: Tons per day threshold is based on annual average

13 Tons Per Day Threshold: LANDFILLS 1st informal draft: Landfills with scales must weigh all loads. A landfill is required to have scales if accepting >100 annual average tons per day. A landfill in a rural jurisdiction is required to have scales if accepting >200 annual average tons per day. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Exempt small volume facilities from weighing all loads. Do not require landfills to reweigh station loads when the landfill and station are operated by the same company.

14 Tons Per Day Threshold: STATIONS 1st informal draft: Stations with scales must weigh all loads. A station is required to have scales if accepting >100 tons per day. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Make tons per day consistent with transfer station regulations. Exempt small volume facilities from weighing all loads. Make >200 tons for rural jurisdictions (as in landfill section)

15 Alternatives to Weighing Concern with existing system: Tonnage data may be inconsistent, since facilities throughout the state are using different conversion factors to estimate weight. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: The Board should require standards for collecting tonnage information.

16 Alternatives to Weighing 1st informal draft: Use conversion factor if facility does not have scales or when scales are not working. Conversion factor of 1 cubic yard = 1,000 pounds Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Alternative conversion factors Flat rate by vehicle type Conversion factors for vehicles based on actual weight surveys

17 Determining Origin and Tracking Tonnages

18 One-Week Surveys vs. Daily Surveys Concern with existing system: Extrapolating tonnage allocations using one week of origin survey data per quarter reduces accuracy of quarterly tonnage allocations, particularly for smaller jurisdictions. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require daily surveys. Exempt self-haul loads delivered in cars and pickup trucks from daily surveys because the amount of waste is relatively small. (Self-haul waste delivered to disposal facilities in these vehicle types was estimated at only 3% of statewide disposal in 1999)

19 One-Week Surveys vs. Daily Surveys 1st informal draft: Daily surveys of all loads with the following possible exceptions: One week per quarter surveys of some self-haul loads Assign all waste to host jurisdiction if authorized by the host jurisdiction Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Exempt self-haul from reporting requirements and from goal measurement system. (Requires statutory revision) Allocations based on one- week surveys will skew the data. Require daily surveys of every load, every day.

20 Allocation of Multi-Jurisdictional Loads: HAULERS 1st informal draft: Estimate amounts from each jurisdiction based on a reasonable method such as: number of bins, total weight, or total capacity. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: A city may create an ordinance that prevents its city’s waste from being mixed with other cities’ waste. (This would be a local option only, not a statewide regulatory requirement.)

21 Allocation of Multi-Jurisdictional Loads: FACILITIES 1st informal draft: Estimate amounts from each jurisdiction based on either: total amount received from each jurisdiction or total amount received from each jurisdiction after adjusting for diversion at the facility. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: No alternatives have been suggested so far. A problem some facilities have is computer software that only allows input of a limited number of jurisdictions and/or fixed percentage allocations.

22 Self-Haul and Documentation Requirements Concern with existing system: Self-haul allocations are difficult to verify. Self-haul may make up a significant amount of an individual jurisdiction’s disposal. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require standard information to be collected from self-haul, cash customers

23 Self-Haul Definitions and Documentation Requirements 1st informal draft: Two categories of self- haulers: Commercial self-hauler and Residential self-hauler (car and pickup truck loads) Alternative suggested by stakeholders: Rather than defining self- haul loads in terms of commercial self-hauler or residential self-hauler, define in terms of volume: loads greater than 6 cubic yards, and loads less than 6 cubic yards.

24 Self-Haul Definitions and Documentation Requirements (continued) 1st informal draft: Collect information from commercial self-haulers on a form: hauler name, jurisdiction of waste origin, hauler address, hauler phone number, and whether waste is from a business or residence. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Do not require forms and only collect jurisdiction-of- origin information Have haulers verify the origin of their loads by pointing out the location on a map. All self-haulers need to complete forms (every load, every day)

25 Franchised Hauler Dispatch Records Concern with existing system: Drivers are typically the ones responsible for providing gate attendant with origin information. Due a variety of factors, such as driver language barriers and complexities of boundaries of waste collection routes, driver reported information may be inaccurate. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require haulers to provide origin data based on dispatch records.

26 Franchised Hauler Dispatch Records 1st informal draft: Commercial haulers provide jurisdiction of origin to facilities based on their dispatch records. Commercial haulers keep addresses of waste collection as back-up for verification purposes. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Keep route book and/or billing information as back-up, instead of individual addresses. Require the city to maintain the back-up information in cases where the city, not the hauler, bills the customer.

27 Jurisdiction Reports from Facilities Concern with existing system: By the time jurisdictions get information from the counties, it is very difficult to go back to haulers and operators to verify questionable allocation amounts. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Have facility operators send disposal reports to jurisdictions at the same time they send them to the counties.

28 Jurisdiction Reports from Facilities 1st informal draft: All facility operators are required to send disposal reports to jurisdictions at the same time they send them to agencies. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Have facility operators send reports only to those jurisdictions that specifically request them.

29 Tracking Categories Concern with existing system: Designated wastes tracked at some landfills can be deducted from annual disposal tonnage. Creates inequity. Large increases in annual disposal are difficult to explain and impact diversion rates (e.g. C&D projects). SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require statewide standards for collecting origin and disposal tonnage information Have more consistency with Board of Equalization reporting requirements.

30 Tracking Categories: Disposal 1st informal draft: Facilities are required to track and report quarterly jurisdiction allocations for designated wastes, C&D debris, inert debris, as well as MSW. Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Rather than track C&D debris or inert debris loads, track loads from “special projects” (Example: Loads directly from Cal Trans road projects) Provide the information as requested by a jurisdiction.

31 Tracking Categories: On-Site Beneficial Use Concern with existing system: Beneficial use is sometimes misreported as ADC. SB 2202 recommendation to address the concern: Require statewide standards for collecting origin and disposal tonnage information.

32 Tracking Categories: On-Site Beneficial Use 1st informal draft: Facilities are required to report the tons and types of materials from each jurisdiction that are used beneficially during the quarter, broken out by: jurisdiction of origin and source (i.e. transfer station, direct haul, and self-haul). Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Do not require on-site beneficial tracking by source.

33 Tracking Categories: Waste Sent Off-Site 1st informal draft: Facilities are required to report the tons and types of materials that are sent off-site each quarter, broken out by: jurisdiction of origin, and source (i.e. transfer station, direct haul, and self-haul). Alternatives suggested by stakeholders: Require only total tons sent off-site. Do not track by source or material type.

34 Next Steps Focused workshops on Transfer Stations will be held on March 24 (Sacramento) and March 25 (Diamond Bar). Revise first informal draft regulations based on written comments and input from the December and March workshops. Second informal draft regulations will be sent out for review and comment. Schedule workshops on second informal draft regulations.

35 Contact Information Diane Shimizu 1001 I Street, P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento, CA tel: (916) fax: (916)