1. Orange County's Regulated Recyclable Material Ordinance Presented to the Municipal Waste Management Association Operations Committee teleconference By Dave Ghirardelli This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep track of these action items during your presentation In Slide Show, click on the right mouse button Select “Meeting Minder” Select the “Action Items” tab Type in action items as they come up Click OK to dismiss this box This will automatically create an Action Item slide at the end of your presentation with your points entered.

2. Background  Orange County: 125K population Rapid development pace – University, RTP suburbs  County C&D disposal unit near capacity.  Disposal facilities in neighboring Counties. But not convenient to most citizens / customers.  2001: 35K tons total C&D 28K tons at County facility; 7K elsewhere  County’s 61% Waste Reduction Goal

3. C&D Recycling Task Force  County Commissioners appointed C&D Recycling Task Force 1999 Task force studied ways to reduce waste Recovery Facility vs. Separation Ordinance  Final Report issued August 2000 Decided not to build expensive facility but mandate recycling of certain materials (wood, metal, cardboard) that make up large portion of C&D

4. Goals of Change in Policy  Procure additional C&D disposal capacity but ensure it lasts Difficult-to-find landfill space being squandered on readily recyclable material Likely long range MSW strategy will be waste transfer  Sustainable development - Environmental impact of local building practices Large use of natural resources in building C&D waste landfilled is one third, by weight, of County’s waste disposal problem

5. Ordinance Development  Solicitation of feedback from the regulated community – Absolutely critical Regular group and individual meetings –Builders and Developers (and HBA) –Waste Haulers – big and small –Chambers of Commerce  Preparation for capital, facility, and staffing needs

6. Key Elements of Ordinance  Mandates separation and recycling of scrap metal, clean wood waste, cardboard, pallets  Permits required before Building Permits issued Administered jointly with Inspections Depts.  Hauler’s Licenses with conditions required  Sorting facilities Certified by the County Gives generators an option other than source- separation

7. Other Features of Ordinance  Ordinance designed for future addition of materials to “regulated” list Creates framework for future policy  Demolition projects delayed under some circumstances to maximize recycling  Prohibits open burning of C&D debris  Requires covering of loads  “Upstream” education promotes deconstruction

8. Staffing  Staff (1) for education efforts aimed at builders, developers, and haulers - Constant Outreach!  Staff (2) and equipment (>$1M) to inspect and manage loads of recyclables  Staff (1) in County Planning Department

9. Enforcement  Enforcement of separation at landfill using penalty fees and incentives/lower fees  Enforcement with civil citations at jobsites, recyclables hauled for illegal disposal, burning, failure to secure, illegal dumping*  Verification Tags on mixed loads  5 violations in 12 months OR 2 violations in 30 days = loss of haulers’ license for 1 year

10. Challenging Issue 1  Demolition waste It is more difficult to separate regulated materials from demolition than from new construction Demolition waste more likely to contain hazardous materials such as wood with lead paint  “Health and safety” “Reasonably possible to separate” Causes inquiries, enables enforcement flexibility Promote deconstruction; Give job-specific goals

11. Challenging Issue 2  C&D material in the MSW stream Wood, cardboard and metal significant in commercial MSW Some customers would be required to recycle, others not; a problem with drawing a ‘C&D’ line  No enforcement on S-F Residential MSW C&D First, commercial next Aluminum can ban example, 57 MPH example

12. Implementing the Ordinance  Passage by BOCC Dec 11, 2001  Present to Municipalities (3)  Prepare facilities, market relationships  Licensing, Permitting and Certification procedures  Enforcement began on October 1, 2002

13. Goals for 1 Year Review  Promised to the Regulated Community  Cost and tonnage figures FY 2002/03 figures include 9 mos. of ordinance  Continuous solicitation of feedback from regulated community – giving a voice  Recommendations for revision  Proposals for addition to regulated recyclable material list

14. Measuring Performance – Tons FY 2001/02FY 2003/03 Disposed (Co. facility) 27,729 tons19,085 tons Disposed (Elsewhere) 7,352 tons7,035 tons Subtotal35,081 tons26,120 tons Recycled (Co. facility) 1,099 tons3,311 tons Recycled (Elsewhere) 0 tons6,653 tons Subtotal1,099 tons9,964 tons

15. Measuring Performance – Dollars FY 2001/02FY 2002/03 Disposal Tipfees$1,274,985$972,995 Recyclables Tipfees (<) $7,506 $22,415 Recyclables Sales (<) $7,810$40,137 RRMO Fees (P,L,C)$0$48,795 Total$1,290,301$1,084,342

16. Measuring Performance – Impacts on the local economy  Building permit fees increased an average of $50 per single family home  Hauling fees up, but less than 5%  2 new (small, primarily manual) recycling facilities  Large C&D processor got $350,000 tip-fee boost  5 new “jobsite recycling” businesses created  No (feared) increase in illegal dumping / burning

17. Documenting Appreciation  One-stop-shopping at Inspections Departments  Facility Improvements  Availability of more earth products  Regular outreach efforts  Reduced / eliminated tip-fees for recyclables

18. Documenting Frustrations  “But I’m not going to your facility. Why should I have to get this <&*% permit or have to recycle?”  Permits required for smaller projects  Permit fees AND tip-fees; paying twice  Unauthorized use of dumpsters  Not enough attention paid to hazardous materials dumped on or near jobsite

19. Ordinance Improvements  Permits: Identification of licensed hauler  License provisions: Requiring identification, numbering, and signage on containers  Certifications: Potential tonnage ceilings  Illegal dumping: Explicit enforcement authority for more than just recyclable material  Potential addition of drywall and electronics