HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-06-12 - AGENDA REPORTS - INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE (2)9
CONSENT CALENDAR
DATE: June 12, 1990
SUBJECT: REPORTS TO TH
COMMITTEE ON
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
r
BACKGROUND
AGENDA REPORT
r
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented by:
John E. Medina
FROM THE CITIZENS' ADVISORY
SOLID WASTE
Attached are two reports from the Solid Waste Committee:
1) Their comments on the UCLA Solid.Waste Study.
2) Their second interim report to the City Council.
The Committee has completed six subcommittee reports and is now in the process
of reviewing each report to hone it into one cohesive report. The Committee
moved at their May 17, 1990 meeting to meet weekly until the final report is
completed. The Committee estimates that the final report will be completed in
September.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Receive and file.
2) Direct Public Works Department to proceed with the implementation of the
UCLA study related to recycling, and outline a program to implement the
remaining waste management elements of the Report.
ATTACHMENTS
APPRO 'ED
••��M�'altem:s�
L;J r
0
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ON
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
TO: City Council
City of Santa Clarita
DATE: May 19, 1990
SUBJECT: INTERIM REPORT - JUNE 1990
0
The Citizens Advisory Committee on Integrated Waste Management, (Committee) is
pleased to submit the following progress report as required by Resolution
89-126 and later amending Resolutions.
1) This report covers the period of time from January 31, 1990 through
May 17, 1990. Eight Committee meetings were held during that period
as well as numerous Sub -committee meetings. The Sub=committees are
up to three members in size.
2) Two members of the Committee found it necessary to resign because of
personal reasons. The Committee requested replacement for those
vacancies in February. During the May 10 meeting, the Committee
agreed to request the City Council to change the composition of the
Committee from eleven members to nine members. The Committee feels
it is now too late to readily integrate new members prior to the
completion of its current assignment.
3) The Committee heard information presented by Mr. Robert Zapple
relative to the Lopez .Canyon Landfill and the problems he felt
resulted.
4) The Committee heard information presented by Mr. Don Naylor, L.A.
County Sanitation District.
5) The Committee received the UCLA report on Waste Management as
forwarded from the City Council. This report was extensively
reviewed and a report issued to the City Council on May 21, 1990.
The overall assessment was favorable. There were some areas of minor
concern outlined in the report to the City Council.
6) The Committee received an update on the status of the proposed
Elsmere Landfill from Mr. John Medina, Director of Public Works.
7)' The Committee received the L.A. County Hazardous Waste Management
Plan, Volume I. Mr. John Medina provided information on this plan
and advised his department was also reviewing on the plan. The
Committee reviewed the plan and has recommended to Staff that the
City of Santa Clarita work with L.A. County as allowed by the plan.
8) The Committee received a draft ordinance from the.City of West.Covina
on commercial hazardous waste reduction plans. The Committee
recommended that the City of Santa Clarita further investigate this
sample ordinance for possible adoption.
9) The Committee received a Staff report on AB 2622 (Easton) and
suggested the City support the Bill. However, this support should
only be given if all glass containers are included in the Bill and
not just beverage bottles.
10) The Sub -committees of this Committee have their reports about 85
percent in the final draft stage. The entire Committee is now in the
process of reviewing presentations by each Sub -committee of their
respective reports.
The final Committee report to the City was targeted for June 1, 1990. The
Committee is estimating .the completion of this final report to the City at
September, 1990.
The Committee has voted to meet each week, .rather than twice a month, in an
effort to expedite the transmittal of the final report to the City.
—ILL `d '
Gene L. Green
Chairman
-2-
A
UCLA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT REPORT REVIEW
The report developed by the UCLA Municipal Solid Waste Management Certificate
Program participants touched on the principle issues addressed primarily in
the State Assembly Bill 939. The report is very comprehensive in its overview
of many salient issues, all of which will eventually require decision on the
part of the City of Santa Clarita.
The organization of the material used in the UCLA report could be used as a
ready and valuable database method of tracking and reporting: changes,
compliance factors for AB939, local monitoring needs, etc.
A great deal of effort was expended in gathering the information and was very
well organized and presented. A survey of the City of Santa Clarita
wastestream was completed and analyzed for content. A larger and more
complete study will be needed if highly sensitive decisions are required on
the methods for disposing of waste.
Source Reduction — Contrary to the report, the Committee questions the idea
that biodegradable products should be pursued by the City on a wholesale
bases. This is based upon the almost negligible "breakdown" of these products
in arid landfills coupled with the fact that most of these products have an
increased volume. Pursuing biodegradable products alone would not
significantly reduce the volume of refuse in landfills.
The more subtle issues of recycling must be reviewed before believing that
recycling of some materials will yield a theoretical reduction in landfill
volume.
Care must be taken in reaching early conclusions about produce bans as current
information for recycling is still in question.
Residential Recycling — The recommendation here is to collect newspapers,
corrugated cardboard,, glass bottles/jars, plastic soda bottles, aluminum/tin
cans and used motor oil. The point is made that State Bills AB 4 and AB 1305
will equalize supply and demand and also stimulate markets. It does not
mention that there may be time limits on how long these materials may be
stored, or the cost of storage. Senate Bill 1221 has increased redemption
values for glass carbonated beverage containers and will more than double the
rate for aluminum cans. AB 2020 has also set aluminum can prices for
redemption. Early results have shown this action results in a glut of those
materials.
Page E-12 of the report makes the important observation that regardless of
whether the recycling program to be used is voluntary or mandatory, some
individuals will not participate. Participation will increase over time but
will require education, advertising and possible monitoring with controls and
a potential for fines.
0
Page 2
Composting - At least 13 different recommendations are included in this
section. An important observation is made in that composting is usually
thought of in terms, of yard waste only. The report indicates that compost
feedstock may also have food, sludge and paper as active parts of the process.
There appears to.be an adequate market in the highly agriculture nature of
California; however, the report doesn't give too much assistance with the
economics of feasibility for success. Instead, there appears to be a large
cost factor involved in helping and encouraging the populace in participating.
The basic problem with composting is seen to be the potential of contaminates
in the compost that make it undesirable. The.encouragement of new landscaping
techniques and regulations is good but, again, is a longer range payoff
approach.
Household Hazardous. Waste — This section brings the suggestion that the City
of Santa Clarita should pursue the County for much of the collection and
disposal of the HHW assistance. At the.same time the City should supply the
labor and insurance components. This Committee disagrees with this suggestion
because of the implied long-term liability exposure to the City.
Materials Recovery Facility - This is an excellent section to back up the
basic recommendation to develop a MRF capability by the City. This Citizens
Committee agrees with this thrust but recognizes that there must be a more
in-depth study accomplished.
The possible development of the overall Santa Clarita Valley area, including
areas outside the control of the City of Santa Clarita, could suggest a MRF
capable of being expanded above the recommended levels. The MRF expansion
capability, coupled with the site location, is seen to be a critical planning
point.
The MRF site could feasibly outlast a landfill site. A site located adjacent
to a rail -haul capability would tend to be almost infinite in life by
comparison.
Summary Comments - The report indicates that the Santa Clarita community
generates over 224,000 tons per year of waste from residential, commercial and
construction/demolition sources. Any decisions regarding a MRF should
consider all these sources.of waste.
The Citizens Advisory Committee on Integrated Waste Management is most
fortunate to have the opportunity to review this excellent and comprehensive
report. It will greatly assist the Advisory Committee in completing its
recommendations to the City Council.