HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-11 - AGENDA REPORTS - SOLID WASTE DIVERSION (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: September 11, 2001
City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Jill Fosselman
SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT ON THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA 1999 AND 2000
SOLID WASTE DIVERSION ANALYSIS
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council to receive the report on the results of the 1999 and 2000 diversion analysis for
information only.
BACKGROUND
Based on the completed analysis of the City's reporting years' 1999 and 2000 disposal
amounts, SCS Engineers (SCS) have determined that at least 18,253.57 tons in 1999 and
38,676.86 tons in 2000 were inaccurately attributed to the City for these reporting years.
Using the SCS revised total disposed amount for the City for 2000, our diversion rate for
2000 is estimated to be 33% (subject to California Integrated Waste Management Board
(CIWMB) approval). Although the CIWMB has the authority to fine jurisdictions for not
meeting AB 939 numeric targets, historically it has never issued a fine and instead works
with each jurisdiction on a case by case basis. Rather than issue fines, the focus of
compliance activity is placed on the quality of diversion programs implemented and
planned for implementation in the jurisdiction to meet the numeric mandates (see attached
email from Steve Uselton, Supervisor at the Los Angeles Section Office of Local Assistance,
dated August 27, 2001).
Based on the final SCS analysis, the spike in disposal was attributed to reporting
inaccuracy that occurred at Chiquita Canyon Landfill (Chiquita), the primary disposal site
for the City since the second quarter of 1999, and is attributed to many factors. The two
most significant areas in which reporting errors of disposed waste origin occurred were in
the reporting of waste disposed by Blue Barrel Disposal and by independent/roll-off
accounts (in which further investigation was outside the scope of the SCS analysis) The
analysis compared Disposal Reporting System (DRS) or Los Angeles County numbers
against Chiquita weigh tickets, invoices and reporting databases with the hauler's route
and collection data. Basically SCS analyzed the nexus of waste disposal between the
records kept by the haulers, the landfill, and what the landfill reported to the County
(which is DRS). The DRS figures are critical because they are the numbers used by the
CIWMB to determine a iurisdiction's diversion rate It is important to note that reporting
origin of waste occurs between haulers and landfills and between landfills and the County
RECEIVED Agenda Item:J(3.
of iurisdiction. Unless the landfill is within a city's iurisdiction, the city has no direct
control over Scalehouse operations at the landfill or landfill reporting to the County.
Staff has worked with the CIWMB Office of Local Assistance (OLA) throughout the
duration of the study to ensure that OLA supported the process and methodology applied in
the analysis. Feedback received from OLA is that they are supportive of the consultants
hired to conduct the study and the process undertaken to identify the sources of the spike in
disposal for the City. OLA also expressed concern that based on the consultant's study,
combined with a population increase of over 37% and increase in commercial taxable sales
of over SS%, the 1990 base year of comparison no longer accurately depicts the City's true
diversion rate. A new Base Year Study will evaluate and determine the total amount of
waste disposed for the City, identify who is generating the waste, and determine how much
of the waste generated can be reduced through recycling and diversion efforts. In addition,
OLA informed staff that it is very common and warranted for cities that have undergone
even less drastic demographic changes to conduct a Base Year Study. The 2000 Base Year
Study for Santa Clarita will determine our actual disposal amount for 2000, the sources of
waste generated, and our true 2000 diversion rate given all of the demographic changes
over the past 10 years. We will use this study to refine and refocus our recycling and
diversion activities to target the areas that will most improve our diversion rate, which is
likely to include commercial and industrial businesses and the construction and
development activity.
Although a total of 56.930.43 tons of incorrectly allocated waste was identified through this
study. SCS indicated a number of areas in which further analysis is likely to identify
additional incorrectly allocated tonnage to the City. Following is an executive summary of
the major findings of the study, recommendations offered to the City to resolve and address
this issue, and the City's proposed next steps and strategy to meet our obligation under AB
939 to achieve 50% diversion.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Other action as determined by Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact is anticipated at this time. However, significant staff resources will be
dedicated to developing the City's 2000 Base Year Study over the next five months. To
ensure that the study is completed by February 2002, the haulers will fund all the elements
of the study that are either outside the technical ability or resource capacity of staff.
ATTACHMENTS
Executive Summary of Final SCS Engineers Diversion Report and Issue Resolution
Email from Steve Uselton, Supervisor at the Los Angeles Section Office of Local Assistance,
dated August 27, 2001
SCS Engineers Diversion Report — City Clerk's Reading File
JAF:ch
S:/PBSfFOSSELMAN/ES/SW/Diversion/9-11 diversion AR.doc
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND ISSUE RESOLUTION
SCS STUDY MAJOR FINDINGS
Based on the research conducted by SCS, the City's disposal increased in 1999 and 2000 due to
the following major findings:
A. Reported Actual v. Survey -Week Disposal Amounts. Chiquita Canyon Landfill
began reporting actual quarterly disposal tonnage to Los Angeles County in July
1999. Previously, the disposal information that was reported to the County was
based on a one-week survey period at the end of each quarter. All municipal landfills
in California began phasing out survey -week reporting in 1999 due to concerns
regarding the inherent inaccuracy of the methodology.
B. Cessation of Monthly Origin of Disposal Reconciliation Reports. In July 1999, both
Blue Barrel Disposal and Atlas Consolidated Services ceased providing monthly
reports to CCL that detailed the amount of waste disposed by origin from the City
and Unincorporated Los Angeles County. At this time, Atlas provided the
Scalehouse at CCL with route breakdowns to detail the City/County allocation of
waste disposed by route. Blue Barrel did not provide the route breakdowns to the
Scalehouse, and instead reported the City/Unincorporated percentage breakdown to
the Scalehouse for each individual truck/route upon disposal at CCL.
C. Majority of Hauler's Disposed Waste Allocated to Citv. From July 1999 to mid-
October 2000, all waste disposed by Blue Barrel at CCL was attributed to the City,
and disposal data for the balance of 2000 from Blue Barrel was inconsistently
allocated between the City and Unincorporated Los Angeles County.
D. Majority of Cash, Independent Accounts Disposed Waste Allocated to Citv. Since
July 1999, most "Cash One -Time Customer" waste, independent disposal accounts
(roll -off accounts), and all waste generated by Magic Mountain (in Unincorporated
Los Angeles County) disposed at CCL was allocated to the City. In addition, waste
generated by the Pitches Detention Center in Unincorporated Los Angeles County
has been periodically attributed to the City both before and after July 1999, although
the LA County Sheriff Department did notify CCL in July 1999 that the waste should
be allocated to Unincorporated Los Angeles County.
11. SCS STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS
A. The City should prepare a new Base Year Study for use by the California Integrated
Waste Management Board to determine compliance with the AB 939 mandated
reduction goal of 50%. Based on the sienificant changes in population size of 37%
and taxable sales of 88% since 1990 which is the current base year, SCS does not
believe that the City is capable of meeting the 50% reduction.
The City is currently preparing the scope for the Base Year Study, of which up to the
full cost will be funded by the haulers. When the annual AB 939 report is filed on
September 1, it will include formal notification of the City's intent to conduct the
study, reservation to request an extension to meet 50% diversion pending the results
of the study, and a request to modify the DRS tonnage for reporting years 1999 and
2000 by the amounts identified in the SCS study.
SCS Engineers 1999 and 2000 Diversion Analysis
Executive Summary and Future Action, page 2
B. Blue Barrel Disposal should formally notify the landfill that all waste originating
from Magic Mountain should be allocated to unincorporated Los Angeles County and
not the City for reporting years 1999 and 2000, as well as all future waste disposed.
The City is currently working with Blue Barrel Disposal to ensure that Blue Barrel
Disposal resolves this issue at the landfill permanently.
C. Blue Barrel Disposal should work with the landfill to develop a system at the
Scalehouse to accurately track correct origin of waste disposed.
During the course of the study and upon SCS identification of landfill -hauler records
discrepancies, Blue Barrel developed an internal system of checks and balances to
ensure waste was reported correctly at the landfill. This system has been
implemented since May 2001. The City is currently preparing formal requests to
Blue Barrel Disposal and CCL to work together to permanently resolve this issue at
the landfill and provide assurance to the City of it's resolution.
D. The City should work with the Scalehouse to develop a system to accurately allocate
waste disposed by cash -customers to the proper jurisdiction.
The City is currently in discussions with CCL to work cooperatively with Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works to implement system Scalehouse enhancements
to obtain correct jurisdiction from cash accounts. Solutions may include providing a
GIS -based map to the Scalehouse, as well as development of a simple process to
verify addresses of cash customers. Los Angeles County, the host jurisdiction of the
landfill, must be included as a third partner with the City and CCL to implement
reporting improvements, as all chances will be subject to the County's consent as the
host iurisdiction of CCL.
E. The City should consider verifying tonnage disposed by non -franchisees at the
landfill, since 28,862.15 tons were disposed of in reporting year 2000 which some
may not all be correctly allocated to the City. In addition, the City may also consider
verifying all of the tonnage disposed at other landfills by non -franchised haulers.
As part of the Base Year Study, the City will verb the tonnage at other landfills for
reporting year 2000, as well as the larger customer accounts at CCL. As discussed
under Recommendation D above, the City will work with CCL and Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works to implement system Scalehouse enhancements
to obtain correct jurisdiction from cash accounts. Los Angeles County, the host
jurisdiction of the landfill, must be included as a third partner with the City and CCL
to implement reporting improvements, as all changes will be subiect to the County's
consent as the host jurisdiction of CCL.
F. Staff should require and enforce that the haulers provide monthly disposal reports
that detail waste disposed by type and allocation.
The City is currently working with the haulers to implement this recommendation.
SCS Engineers 1999 and 2000 Diversion Analysis
Executive Summary and Future Action, page 3
G. Staff should direct the haulers to reconcile billings and weigh tickets from the landfill
to ensure correct reporting of waste disposed.
As mentioned under Recommendation C above, Blue Barrel Disposal has already
implemented this practice; weigh tickets are compared against hauler route sheets
and invoices from the landfill on a regular basis. The City will work with all of the
franchisees to ensure that they provide the City with regular assurances that this
recommendation has been successfully and permanently implemented.
III. ISSUES UNRESOLVED IN THE SCS STUDY
All reporting of waste disposed and waste origin for the purposes of determining AB 939
compliance (development of DRS numbers) has occurred outside of the scope of the City's
franchise agreements with the haulers; reporting occurs between the hauler and the landfill and
between the landfill and the County. The City does not have jurisdiction over data collection or
reporting practices at Chiquita Canyon Landfill.
SCS indicated in the study that reporting of origin at the Scalehouse should be improved for Blue
Barrel disposed waste, cash -customer accounts, and other non -franchised or independent hauler
accounts. Processes should be developed to ensure that correct origin is captured, which may
include address verification of tonnage origin, verification against a GIS map, utilization of coded
breakdowns in the Scalehouse tracking system, or application of a GIS -based tracking system.
As indicated above, staff will work with the haulers, the landfill, and Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works to develop pemianent solutions to address these issues and ensure
proper accountability for reporting. The City is aware of a landfill that is already implementing
similar procedures, and will interview the landfill to determine what further assurances should be
developed at Chiquita Canyon Landfill to ensure that origin is accurately captured.
During reporting year 2000, SCS identified that the amount of non -hauler disposed waste at CCL
that was allocated to the City was 28,862.15 tons, or 17% of the City's SCS -calculated 2000 DRS
amount. Staff believes that the majority of this waste is probably from roll -off companies
providing construction and demolition disposal services in the Valley. Since the majority of
development is occurring outside the City limits, it is very probable that some percentage of this
waste should be allocated to Unincorporated Los Angeles County. ht addition to origin controls
at the landfill, this issue will be addressed in the development of the City's non-exclusive roll -off
franchise through reporting requirements and recycling incentives/requirements.
IV. NEXT STEPS AND RESOLUTIONS
Towards resolving the 1999, 2000 and potential future reporting inaccuracies in the calculation of
the City's diversion rate, staff will pursue the following next steps and processes:
A. Issuance of letters from the City to the haulers (copying to Los Angeles County)
requesting verification in writing to the City of the accuracy of the numeric findings
of the SCS study;
B. Submittal of the 2000 AB 939 annual report, including a copy of the SCS study,
filing tonnage modification forms for 1999 and 2000 based on the findings of the
study, copies of letters to and from the haulers (copying to Los Angeles County)
verifying the numeric findings, formally providing intent to conduct a Base Year
Study for 2000, and reserving the right to file an extension to meet 50% pending the
results of the 2000 Base Year Study;
SCS Engineers 1999 and 2000 Diversion Analysis
Executive Summary and Future Action, page 4
C. Development of a scope for the 2000 Base Year Study and initiation of the study for
completion by February 2000;
D. Partnership with Chiquita Canyon Landfill, Los Angeles County, and Blue Barrel
Disposal to ensure a system is developed to accurately identify and track origin of
disposal at the landfill for Blue Barrel, cash -customers, and independent disposal
companies;
E. Ensure that Blue Barrel Disposal permanently resolves the disposal origin errors for
the Magic Mountain account with Chiquita Canyon Landfill and that assurances are
provided to the City regarding issue resolution; and
F. Ensure that the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department resolves the Pitchess Detention
Center disposal origin errors with Chiquita Canyon Landfill and that assurances are
provided to the City regarding issue resolution.
G. Upon resolution of the audit of the refuse franchise program, the City will pursue
development of the non-exclusive roll -off franchise program.