07/15/1991 - Packet AGENDA
SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MONDAY, JULY 15, 1991 - 6:00 PM
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
13125 SW HALL BLVD.
TIGARD, OR
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL: McREYNOLDS DISPENZA SULLIVAN
IRWIN JACOBS WOGEN
MEINECKE
3 . APPROVE MINUTES: 6/17/91
4. WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM - YEAR 2 REVIEW & RECYCLING CONTAINER
DISCUSSION
o Bill Martin and Delyn Kies from Washington County
5. SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
6. OTHER BUSINESS
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Solid Waste Advisory Committee will go
into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1)
(f) & (h) to consider records that are exempt from public
inspection and current/pending litigation.
8. ADJOURNMENT
TO ENSURE A QUORUM TO CONDUCT BUSINESS, PLEASE CALL LIZ NEWTON AT
639-4171, EXTENSION 308 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND.
le/u&f-a
o Lk ►� Co P
�J
0
rn
►---di S C L'A"S Loot V1d1 e_;--
+e- Y%Vn
ew,
�� hner W ; � ,p ova
r
i
SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
June 17, 1991
1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
2. ROLL CALL:
Present: Gerry McReynolds, Chairman
Thomas Sullivan Cece Dispenza
Mark Irwin Mike Meinecke
Mike Leichner, Pride Disposal Company
Tom Miller, Miller Sanitary Service
Larry Schmidt, Schmidt's Sanitary Service
Loreen Edin, Staff Liaison
Lee Kell, Haulers' Legal Counsel
Frank H. Hilton, Jr. , Haulers' Legal Counsel
Wayne Lowry, Finance Director (left at 7: 30 PM)
3 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 5/20/91
Section 5, last paragraph should be amended to indicate that
Pride Disposal was non-supportive of method (A) . Motion by
Committee Member Meinecke, seconded by Committee Member Irwin
to approve as amended. Approved by unanimous vote of Committee
present.
4. FINANCIAL REVIEW OF HAULERS' RECORDS
A. Chairman McReynolds reported that the Council had
approved the Metro pass through increase based on the
same method the City historically used by spreading the
increase throughout the rate structure.
B. Wayne Lowry reported City Council was aware of the
Committee's concern about rate disparity. He further
noted that Council had requested he and Loreen Edin
conduct a financial review of the haulers as soon as
possible to allow resolution to the disparity question.
Wayne Lowry presented the scope of work staff had
developed and asked if the Committee had any suggestions.
The Committee suggested periodic progress reports would
be helpful to them. Consensus of Committee was that
staff should move forward with the scope of study
presented.
WAYNE LOWRY LEFT THE MEETING: 7: 30 PM
5. RECOGNITION OF NAME CHANGE & WORKLOAD DISCUSSION
A. Loreen Edin noted that the name of the Utility &
Franchise Committee had been formally changed to the
Solid Waste Advisory Committee by Council. She noted the
Committee should discuss how to accomplish the general
functions and duties outlined by the resolution. Loreen
Edin advised the Committee some terms of office were
changed to allow all to expire on 12/31.
6. SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE REVIEW
A. Chairman McReynolds stated that the Council work session
was scheduled for 6/18 at 6: 30 PM with the public hearing
scheduled for 6/25 at 7: 30 PM. Chairman McReynolds also
noted that he had suggested to Tom Miller that haulers
might wish to develop a historical review of the rate
disparity issue since redistricting may be an item of
discussion at the Council level.
Chairman McReynolds stated he wished to have the
Committee, haulers, and staff positions well documented
in writing for the Council public hearing since there
were differences of opinion. He also noted that he would
request Council pull the public hearing until the
Committee, staff and haulers had an opportunity to
resolve the differences.
Loreen Edin noted that the public hearing process is
where Council normally hears differences between the
groups. She also commented that she understood that the
haulers and the Committee had decided to present their
arguments verbally rather than in writing.
B. Lee Kell expressed concern that the franchise ordinance
was a contract and if it was to be changed it must be by
agreement from both sides. He suggested that Council be
reminded of this at the beginning of the public hearing.
Committee, staff, and haulers held lengthy discussion
regarding some items of difference.
C. Motion by Committee Member Meinecke, seconded by
Committee Member Irwin, to recommend Council postpone the
public hearing on the franchise ordinance revisions until
consensus is reached by all parties involved.
7 . OTHER BUSINESS
A. Discussion was held about how to notify people when they
illegally dump in another persons trash container.
Loreen Edin agreed to send notice to the person illegally
dumping that it was against the franchise ordinance to do
so. She also noted that the City is currently reviewing
the code enforcement position to redetermine how to best
use that method to enforce all codes.
8. ADJOURNMENT: 8:46 PM
Minutes prepared by Loreen Edin
• MEMORANDUM •
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Solid Waste Advisory Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin
DATE: July 9, 1991
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #4 - Waste Reduction Program
This agenda item will be a two-fold issue for consideration.
(1) Year 2 review of the Washington County Wasteshed Waste
Reduction Plan will be presented by Bill Martin, Washington
County's Recycling Coordinator.
Attached is a full copy of the Year 2 Plan with a one page
synopsis on top. This is scheduled on 7/23 for Council
approval of an intergovernmental agreement with Washington
County to proceed with the Year 2 Plan.
(2) Task 1 (defined on pages 15 - 18) requires the City to set a
service standard for residential recycling containers. This
has been called the "bin" versus "bucket" debate. Delyn Kies,
Solid Waste Management Coordinator from Washington County,
will be available to answer questions.
Administratively Washington County and all Wasteshed cities
other than Tigard, Sherwood, & Durham have agreed to provide
bins for recycling. Sherwood and Durham have indicated they
are willing to use the same type of recycling container that
Tigard wants to use. It should be noted that the first year
financial support for the bin purchase will come from METRO.
After discussing this issue, both Gerry McReynolds and I
believe the bin container in Tigard is most cost effective in
the long run for many of the same reasons as you will see
listed on page 17 of the attached report.
Also attached is the results of a curbside collection field
visit conducted by Bill Martin. It was hoped this would
indicate Washington County's current experience with bins and
buckets. Information was hoped to answer the following
questions: (1) which container is faster to collect; and (2)
which container encourages a higher volume of recycling.
Tigard must declare the type of container no later than 7/16
in order to be included in the initial order of bins and allow
Tigard to start the educational promotion of the recycling
container program at the same time as the rest of the County.
For this reason, it is necessary to come to agreement on this
issue at Monday's meeting.
le/ms
Curbside Collection
With Bins With Buckets
Time on route
1 hour 54 minutes 2 hours 27 minutes
Distance on route .6 miles 7 miles
Stops timed 134 121
Total pounds 2780 1620
Avg. time per stop 28.3 seconds 27.1 seconds
Avg. pounds per stop 20.75 13.39
Source:
an unscientific field visit by
Bill Martin, Recycling Coordinator
Washington County
Waste Reduction Tasks - Year 2 * = Metro required tasks
Task 1*. Regulate residential
garbage collection to implement Task 2*. Regulate commercial
weekly curbside -l�
garbage collection to implement
recycling program
with containers. =��_'_ waste audit and recycling program.
- --
Task 3*. Regulate multi-family
�' '�► 1_. ' `;.) garbage collection to implement a
recycling program with economic
incentives for owner/managers and
Task 4*. Implement in-house haulers.
recycling programs to include
as many materials -,
as practical at all Task 5*. Expand local
facilities. �� I commercial waste audit
expertise for a variety of
�businesses. Document a p
designated number of
commercial waste audits.
Develop a more comprehensive
Task 6*. Invite schools to program for year three.
participate in waste audits Task 7*. Develop wording to
g facilitate recycling during design
and encoura a them to
implement waste reduction review and site plan review
and recycling programs. procedures of commercial
9� - and multi-family units.
5E�
Task 8*. Develop a recycling OA
container systems plan in
Task 10*. Complete an �:.4 , multi-family residential units.
Annual Report Worksheetfor year one and submit it ' . = \ ► ,�
to Metro by September 30, o
1991. '; b� Task 9*. Plan and
Task 11. Develop a plan for implement a yard
special waste collection. f ` debris collection
Task 12. Perform a feasibility program that meets the regional
study on an intermediate processing and yard debris recycling plan minimum
marketing program of residential , multi- requirements.
family and commercial recycled materials.
Task 13. Perform analysis of recycling Task 14. Third year
incentives with the development of model work plan is written
language for establishmentof service and submitted on time.
standards for franchised haulers.
WASHINGTON
C ;5
OUNTY
111111111111111111111111110�
111110� 11,11
jjF
IIIllilllllllllllln
��IIIIII
Waste Reduction Plan Budget
Local Metro Cooperative Prorated
Government Outright Administrative Promotional
Generated "Challenge" Program Support
Revenue Grant Funds Support
Washington County $114,938 $64,533 $179,471 $19,132
Beaverton 0 26,955 26,955 7,991
Cornelius 0 3,073 3,073 911
Durham 0 500 500 148
Forest Grove 0 6,865 6,865 2,035
Hillsboro 0 19,044 19,044 5,646
King City 0 1,028 1,028 305
Sherwood 0 1,574 1,574 467
Tigard 0 14,661 14,661 4,347
Tualatin 0 7,638 7,638 2,264
Wilsonville 0 3,565 3,565 1,057
$114,938 149,436 $264,374 $44,304
A Cooperative Recycling Program of Washington County and the Cities of
Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro,
King City, North Plains, Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, and Wilsonville
WASHINGTON
COUNTY
'� "'•���i;iiiiiiiiillllll �
III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIi���
•n�llllll
Washington County Wasteshed
Five-Year
Waste Reduction Plan
Year 2
A Cooperative Recycling Program of Washington County and the Cities of
Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro,
King City, North Plains, Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, and Wilsonville
4
Washington County Wasteshed Policy Committee
Steve Larrance, Chairman Washington County
John Atkins City of Beaverton
Jerald Taylor City of Cornelius
Roger Gano City of Durham
Clifford Clark City of Forest Grove
Shirley Huffman City of Hillsboro
Lenore Ackerson City of King City
James Rapp City of Sherwood
Liz Newton City of Tigard
Steve Stolze City of Tualatin
Tom Barthel City of Wilsonville
Richard Devlin Metro
Larry Bauer Metro
Bob Peterson Haulers Association
Marion Garbarino Haulers Association
Don Hamburg Haulers Association
John Walker Haulers Association
Judy Mitchell Citizen
Kate Olson Citizen
Washington County Wasteshed Technical Committee
Bill Martin, Chairman Washington County
Beth Erlendsen City of Beaverton
Jerald Taylor City of Cornelius
Roger Gano City of Durham
Jeff Hecksel City of Forest Grove
Cecilia Petrocco City of Hillsboro
Lenore Ackerson City of King City
James Rapp City of Sherwood
Loreen Edin City of Tigard
Emilie Kroen City of Tualatin
Tom Barthel City of Wilsonville
Bob Peterson Hauler Association
Mike Leichner Hauler Association
Washington County Program Management
Alice McCartor, Director, Department of Health and
Human Services
Delyn Kies, Solid Waste Management Coordinator
Bill Martin, Recycling Coordinator
Washington County Wasteshed Franchised Hauler Sub-committee
Keith Eldein Aloha Garbage Company
Bob Peterson Cedar Mill Disposal
Gary Douglas Cornelius Disposal
Drew Ryan Dee's Sanitary Service
Don Hamburg Don's Garbage Service
Ambrose Calcagno Eager Beaver Sanitary
Forest Grove Disposal
Pacific Garbage
Public Sanitary
Jeff Garbarino Garbarino Disposal
Ron Maier Hillsboro Garbage
Tom Miller Miller Sanitary
Mike Leichner Pride Disposal
Lloyd Hodge Rossman's Sanitary
Larry Schmidt Schmidt Sanitary
Linda Sevier Sevier and Son
Sally Fender United Disposal
George Hohnstein Valley Garbage
Ed Wagenblast Valley West Refuse
John Walker Walker Garbage
David Tonges West Beaverton Sanitary
John Romero West Slope Garbage
Graphic Artist
Ron Talaga, Washington County LUT
Layout and Design
Joan Suess, Washington County Support Services
• a
Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Waste Reduction Plan
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Local Government Goals . . . . . . . . . 6
Local Government Responsibilities 7
Waste Reduction Goals - Year 2 . . . . 14
Severability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Appendix A - Year 2 Goals . . . . . . . . . 45
Appendix B - Years 3, 4 & 5 Projections . . 47
Appendix C - Container Budget . . . . . . . 49
List of Figures
1. Areas of Responsibility . . . . . . . 8
2 . Franchised Haulers by Jurisdiction 10
3 . Funding Sources and Allocations . . . . . . . 11
4. Local Jurisdiction Information . . . . . . . . 13
5. Multi-Family Recycling . . . . . . . 23
6. Multi-Family Recycling Adjusted . . . . . . 27
7. Construction and Demo Debris . . . . . . . . 33
S. Land Clearing Debris . . . . . . . . . 33
9. Special Wastes Disposed . . . . . . . . . . . 34
10. High Grade Waste Projection . . . . . . . . . 35
11. County Waste Reduction Estimates . . . . . . . 36
12 . Total Waste Reduction Program . . . . . . . . 37
13 . Potential Waste Reduction Program . . . . . . 40
WASHINGTON COUNTY FIVE YEAR WASTE REDUCTION PLAN
Year 2
Executive Summary
INTRODUCTION
The Washington County Board of Commissioners entered into
intergovernmental agreements in 1990 with the Cities of Beaverton,
Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood,
Tigard, Tualatin and Wilsonville to work cooperatively to comply
with the Metropolitan Service District's (Metro) required waste
reduction plan.
The "Washington County Wasteshed Five-Year Waste Reduction Plan -
Year 1" established tasks for completion during the first year.
The Regional Solid Waste Management Plan requires continued waste
reduction activities for each of these eleven "participating or
local governments" within the Metro region.
GOALS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The cooperative plan allows local governments within Washington
County to include waste reduction as the "Foundation" for the local
option solid waste systems plan. The stated goal of a cooperative
approach to waste reduction is to provide for an effective and
efficient, county-wide program that avoids jurisdictional
redundancy. By coordinating the waste reduction activities of
eleven jurisdictions and twenty-six franchised haulers, a
consistent recycling program may be presented to the public.
The responsibility of waste reduction delineates two separate
areas. Direct authority and administrative responsibility for solid
waste reduction remains with each local government. Duties continue
to include rate setting, enforcement, code revisions, and internal
recycling programs. Technical expertise for program administration
and implementation for solid waste reduction is concentrated at the
County level with local jurisdictional support. Washington County
staff will provide plan development, report writing, program
coordination, public information, education, promotion and meeting
attendance involved with the recycling program.
Each local jurisdiction is responsible for providing revenue to
support the cost of Year 2 administrative programs provided by
County staff. The participating cities can meet this revenue
requirement through assignment of the Metro "Challenge" Grant
allocation to Washington County. The administrative tasks assumed
by the County are at the discretion and with the cooperation of the
participating cities. Cities retain the option of providing an
additional service level within their jurisdictions.
1
J
l
WASTE REDUCTION TASKS - YEAR 2
Task 1 - Regulate residential garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
the local government to fully implement a uniform
and comprehensive weekly curbside recycling prograp
with containers.
Regulation of residential garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions. Twenty-seven franchise
haulers in the County have a service certificate for residential
garbage collection. Rates are . set by each local jurisdiction.
Twenty-three haulers are required to provide curbside recycling
service to their customers. Weekly curbside collection of
recyclables has been implemented County wide.
The Cities of Tualatin and Wilsonville and unincorporated
Washington County each have designated single 14-gallon bins as the
container system for implementation. Each City Council will need
to evaluate their city's container needs and designate their choice
for service that meets Metro's minimum requirements. Promotion of
the residential container program will be provided by the County.
Task 2 - Regulate commercial garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
the local government to implement a uniform
commercial waste audit and recycling program that
includes collection standards, waste audits and
economic incentives.
Regulation of commercial garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions. Twenty-seven franchise
haulers in the County have a service certificate for commercial
garbage collection. Rates are set by each local jurisdiction.
Twenty-four haulers are required by law to provide recycling
service to their commercial customers.
Preliminary work will be accomplished during this year to assure
a fully implemented commercial recycling plan in Year 3 . Metro
required waste audits be performed by the County for each
participating local jurisdiction. Each local jurisdiction needs to
establish a commercial recycling financial rate that is appropriate
to the cost of commercial recycling service.
Task 3 - Regulate multi-family garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
local government to implement a multi-family
recycling program that gives apartment
owners/managers an economic incentive to promote
recycling while allowing haulers to recover the
costs of providing recycling services.
2
a
Regulation of multi-family garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions through the commercial
rates. The twenty-seven franchise haulers in the County have a
service certificate for multi-family garbage collection. Rates are
set by each local jurisdiction. Twenty-three haulers are required
by law to provide recycling service to their multi-family
customers.
Participating jurisdictions initiated a county-wide multi-family
recycling program under Year 1. Provisions of that program outline
ninety complexes that will be provided recycling service the first
year. Under a revised budget, it is anticipated that 87 additional
complexes will be provided containers for recycling service during
Year 2.
Each local jurisdiction will need to review the establishment of
a separate multi-family garbage rate and additionally review the
establishment of a multi-family recycling rate that is appropriate
to the cost for multi-family recycling service. The County will
provide promotion and eduction to assure public acceptance of this
program.
Task 4 - Implement in-house recycling programs to include as
many materials as practical at all city and county
facilities.
The participating jurisdictions developed a model purchasing and
waste reduction policy under Year 1 that is being adopted by the
governing bodies with appropriate changes. This model policy
addressed management procedures for most common materials
associated with local governments. Status on adoption will be
included in the Year 1 report.
Task 5 - Expand local expertise on the part of haulers,
recyclers, and/or local recycling coordinators to
perform commercial waste audits for a variety of
different kinds of businesses. Document the
completion of, at a minimum, ten commercial waste
audits or waste audits for one percent of the
businesses in the commercial sector, whichever is
less. Develop a plan for a more comprehensive
commercial waste audit program to be implemented in
year three.
See Task #2.
Task 6 - Provide schools the opportunity to participate in
waste audits and encourage them to implement waste
reduction and recycling programs.
Washington County has provided a county-wide school education
program since 1988. The program has continually increased the scope
3
of school education from classroom presentation to assistance in
the establishment of in-house recycling activities. County staff
will conduct a survey of all schools in Washington County to
determine the status of school recycling and will continue to
provide assistance for improving school recycling.
Task 7 - Begin developing language to insert into design
review and/or site plan review procedures to
facilitate the incorporation of recycling at
commercial facilities and multi-family dwelling
units.
The participating jurisdictions will designate their
building/planning officials or designates as representatives to a
work group to develop model language for each City/County to adopt
during Year 2. Additionally, design standards for solid waste
facilities will be developed to assure economical and efficient
service by the franchised hauler.
Task 8 - Develop a plan to install recycling container
systems in multi-family residential units.
See Task #3.
Task 9 - Plan and implement a yard debris collection program
that meets at least the minimum requirements of the
regional yard debris recycling plan.
In November, 1989, Washington County Wasteshed received approval
from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for its yard
debris recycling plan. Metro's Regional Yard Debris Plan set
parameters for compliance that are within the program scope of the
Washington County plan. The County plan met State recycling goals
in 1990. Local jurisdictions will continue to implement provisions
of the plan.
Task 10 - Complete an Annual Report Worksheet for year one of
the Program. Submit this worksheet to Metro by
September 30, 1991.
Washington County, with local government support, will submit the
required report to Metro.
Task 11 - Develop a plan for special waste collection.
Metro designated special waste as part the region's 56% waste
reduction goal. Local governments need to consider special waste
in local waste reduction program goals and need to determine the
best approach to handle this wastestream.
Currently not fully regulated by local governments, special waste
collection offers opportunities to both increase overall waste
4
reduction and to increase revenue collected through local solid
waste fees.
Task 12 - Perform a feasibility study on an intermediate
processing and marketing program of residential,
multi-family and commercial recycled materials.
The procurement by Metro of a high-grade facility in Washington
County has the potential to address three areas of concern to waste
reduction programs already implemented or being contemplated in the
near future. These concerns deal with the expanding number of items
recycled separately at the curb, the contamination problem of
multi-family recycled material and the potential for "wet/dry"
commercial collection. This study will analyze any economic
advantages to providing mechanical sorting capacity for post
collection of recyclables.
Task 13 - Perform an analysis of recycling incentives with the
development of model language for establishment of
local governmental service standards for franchised
haulers.
Analysis needs to be done to better define service cost centers for
select recycling activities of the franchised haulers to assure
recycling incentives and other State mandated economic tests are
fully developed in the waste reduction program. This analysis
coincides with continued use and refinement of a common Annual
Report by each participating jurisdiction.
Task 14 - Third year work plan is written and submitted on
time.
Participating jurisdictions have made a commitment to develop and
recommend revenue requirements for the 1992-93 budget process with
preliminary cost estimates by November 1991.
5
WASHINGTON COUNTY WASTESHED FIVE-YEAR
WASTE REDUCTION PLAN
Year 2
BACKGROUND
The Washington County Board of Commissioners entered into
intergovernmental agreements in 1990 with the Cities of Beaverton,
Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood,
Tigard, Tualatin and Wilsonville to work cooperatively to comply
with the Metropolitan Service District's (Metro) required waste
reduction plan. The "Washington County Wasteshed Five-Year Waste
Reduction Plan - Year 1" established ten tasks for completion
during the first year.
The Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (RSWMP) requires continued
waste reduction activities for each local government within the
Metro region. The RSWMP encompasses the overall solid waste program
with which all 27 local governments that make up the Metropolitan
Service District (Metro) must comply. The RSWMP contains policy
objectives and program requirements as well as jurisdictional
responsibilities for providing solid waste management to the
Portland metropolitan region.
Metro's "Five-Year Work Plan" contains a list of items that local
governments are responsible for accomplishing. The annual work
programs are one part of the overall chapter and constitute 34
items that local governments may implement to reach the regional
goal of a 56% reduction of the wastestream.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT GOALS
The Washington County Wasteshed is defined by the State of Oregon
as the area within the county boundaries, excluding portions of
the Cities of Portland, Lake Oswego and Wilsonville, and including
all of the City of Tualatin. The Cities of Banks, Gaston and North
Plains, as well as most of the rural part of unincorporated
Washington County, lie outside Metro district boundaries and are
not required to meet any of the regional waste reduction goals.
The eleven local governments of Washington County and the Cities
of Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King
City, Sherwood, Tigard, Tualatin and Wilsonville are within the
Metro boundaries and are required to submit the Year 2 of a five-
year waste reduction plan to Metro by July 1, 1990. These
jurisdictions have worked together previously and received approval
6
on November 21, 1989 from the Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) for a cooperative regional plan for yard debris recycling and
approval from Metro for Year 1 of the Five-Year Waste Reduction
Plan.
The cooperative approach to waste reduction allows local
governments within Washington County to include waste reduction as
the "Foundation" for the local option solid waste systems plan.
Local governments collectively develop and implement a five-year
waste reduction effort while maintaining local authority over solid
waste. By achieving maximum waste reduction capacity within
Washington County, the need for supporting facilities for
transferring and disposing of the remaining wastestream will be
minimized. This type of approach complements the work of the
Washington County Facilities Siting Steering Committee which has
responsibility for recommending to Metro the support facilities
needed within the County.
The stated goal of such an approach is to provide for an efficient,
county-wide program that avoids jurisdictional redundancy.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Areas of responsibility have been defined for each local
jurisdiction in Year 1 and need to be reaffirmed for Year 2 . Signed
Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) between the cities and
Washington County formally define these responsibilities. (See
separate document. ) Figure 1 outlines the areas of responsibility
as defined in the Year 1 IGA. Responsibilities to be added under
the Year 2 plan are denoted (*) .
A narrative description of Year 1 areas of responsibility of each
jurisdiction delineated two separate areas: direct authority of
solid waste reduction and technical assistance for waste reduction.
Administrative responsibility and authority for solid waste
reduction remained with each local government while technical
expertise for solid waste reduction was concentrated at the County
level with local jurisdictional support.
Each local government retained authority over the collection of
solid waste. Such responsibilities as rate setting, franchise
collection area allotments, franchise fee collection, complaint
investigation, code enforcement, and other traditional duties all
remain with each individual government.
7
Figure 1 Areas of Responsibilty - Year 2
County Tasks as City Tasks as Participating City
Program Administrator (Includes unincorporated County)
Technical Expertise Rate Setting for Franchised Haulers
Plan Development Establish Collection Rates
Develop Processing Report' That Allow Reasonable Return
Data Compilation Based on Local Review Standards
Report Writing Establish Multi-Family Recycling
Program Coordination Rate Based on Approved Formula`
Technical Advice to Internal Recycling
Particapating Governments Office Paper Recycling
General Public Information Purchasing Policy Adoption
Model Code Development Waste Reduction Enforcement
General Promotion Complaint Investigation
Develop Incentives Model Language" Service Standard Adoption
Field Work Reporting Requirements
Single-Family Recycling Code Revisions
Coordinate Waste Audits" Contribute Revenue to Program
Multi-Family Recycling* for Administrative Costs
Commercial Recycling" Designate County as Multi-Family
I� School Education Grant Money Administrator
Community Education Designate County as "Challenge"
Special Event Promotion Grant Money Administrator
Meeting Attendance Authorize County to Apply for Waste
Metro Committees and Reduction Grants as Applicable*
Meetings Designate Waste Reduction Contact
DEQ Meetings
Other Required Meetings
Contribute Revenue to Program
and Administrative Costs as Lead
Jurisdiction
Specific waste reduction programs such as internal recycling,
internal institutional purchasing, rate incentives/disincentives,
code revisions, recycling complaints, and enforcement also
continued under local government authority. Additionally, each
local jurisdiction was responsible to ensure that their franchise
haulers submit required reports on a regular basis.
Local governments continued to establish collection rates that
allow a reasonable return to franchised solid waste collection
businesses based on an established efficiency standard. Local
8
governments are responsible to ensure adequate return to their
franchised haulers, or to a designated provider. Because franchised
haulers may incur additional costs for implementing programs
identified under this plan, each jurisdiction should consider such
costs in the annual rate review process. Local governments retain
authority to review hauler costs and to perform audits of financial-
records.
Each local jurisdiction was responsible for providing revenue to
cover the cost of Year 1 administrative programs provided by County
staff. For Year 1 of the Five-Year Waste Reduction Plan, the
participating cities met this revenue requirement through
assignment of the Metro "Challenge" Grant allocation to Washington
County.
Washington County, providing waste reduction expertise, was
responsible for overall administration of the waste reduction plan.
These responsibilities included representing participating
jurisdictions at regional, State and Federal meetings, conferences
and workshops; producing a quarterly newsletter on wasteshed solid
waste reduction activity; producing a quarterly report on
implementation of the five-year plan; producing an annual report;
and producing any other required program report to meet State and
Metro goals.
Additionally, Washington County provided lead planning work
necessary to meet all Metro goals. This work included staff to
conduct meetings, research and compile information, review plan
revisions, and provide technical assistance as needed by
participating jurisdictions.
Field work required in implementing Year 1 of the waste reduction
plan was provided by County staff. This work included overseeing
implementation of the single-family and multi-family recycling
programs. Washington County staff was responsible for major
promotion and education programs developed under the plan, other
than those programs provided by the franchised haulers. These
programs included school and community education as well as
special-event promotion.
Additionally under this plan, County staff would develop a waste
audit program and commercial recycling program in anticipation of
requirements under the remaining five-year plan. Waste audits would
be performed by County staff during this year's program.
The Metro "Challenge" Grant revenue was distributed in February,
1991. The Wasteshed has until September, 1991 to complete the
listed tasks under Year 1. A final report will be submitted to
Metro and the participating jurisdictions and will include the
success of the Year 1 plan in reaching the goals set.
The defined areas of responsibility for Year 1 remain in place for
9
Year 2. The Year 2 plan entails implementation of the program tasks
from July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992. Additional County
responsibilities have been added that involve: the development of
a plan in conformance with the responsibilities established in
Metro's Special Waste Chapter of the RSWMP for special waste
collection, analysis of rates to assure recycling incentives with
development of model language for local service standards, and
performing a feasibility study on the intermediate processing and
marketing of residential recyclables.
None of the County administrative responsibilities is exclusive of
the participating cities. The administrative tasks assumed by the
County are at the discretion of and with the cooperation of the
participating cities. Cities retain the option of providing an
additional service level within their jurisdictions.
Figure 2 Franchised Haulers by Jurisdiction - Year 2
Curbside
Recycling Washington Beaverton Cornelius Durham Forest Hillsboro King Sherwood Tigard Tualatin Wilsonville
Offered County Grove City
Aloha Garbage X X X X
Cedar Mill Dis . X X
Cornelius Dis . X X X X
Doe's Sanitary X X
Don's Garbage X X X
Ea er Beaver X X X
Forest Grove X X X
Garbarino Dis . X X X X
Hillsboro Garb. X X X
Keller Drop Box X X
MDC X
Miller Sanitary X X X X
Nehalem Valley X
Newbera Garb. X
Pacific Garbage X X
Pride Disposal X X X X X
Public Sanitary X X X
Rossman's San. X X X
Schmidt Sanitary X X X X
Sevier and Son X X
S WATCO X
United Disposal X X X X
Valley Garbage X X X
Valley West Ref. X X X
Walker Garbage X X
W. Beaverton X X X
West Sloe X X
10
Figure 2 shows the distribution of the twenty-seven franchised
haulers by local jurisdiction. Twenty-three haulers are required
to provide curbside recycling services within the jurisdictions in
which they operate.
Figure 3 shows per-capita revenue contributed by each jurisdiction
to the overall implementation of Year 2 of the Washington County
Wasteshed Five-Year Waste Reduction Plan.
The Metro "Challenge" Grant was reduced by 20% from Year 1. Metro
has set the policy of reducing the grant funds by 20% per year over
the five year work plan. Thus, at the end of fifth year of the
waste reduction activity, Metro will no longer be a contributor.
Figure 3 Funding Sources and Allocations -Year 2
Cooperative
Franchise Fee Metro Outright Administrative
1990 Generated "Challenge" Program
Population Revenue Grant Funds Support
Washington County 128,086 $114,938 $64,533 $179,471
Beaverton 53,500 $0 $26,955 $26,955
Cornelius 6,100 $0 $3,073 $3,073
Durham 760 $0 $500 $500
Forest Grove 13,625 $0 $6,865 $6,865
Hillsboro 37,800 $0 $19,044 $19,044
King City 2,040 $0 $1,028 $1,028
Sherwood 3,125 $0 $1,574 $1,574
Tigard 29,100 $0 $14,661 $14,661
Tualatin 15,160 $0 $7,638 $7,638
Wilsonville 7,075 $0 $3,565 $3,565
296,371 $114,938 $149,436 $264,374
11
Washington County similarly reduced support to the waste reduction
program by 20% from Year 1 levels. The County has established a
policy of continuing to work with local governments toward common
waste reduction goals, but has not established a policy of
continued support for a determined time period. The County will
review this issue on a yearly basis, unless a long-terns
intergovernmental agreement is reached.
The Year 2 budget shows revenue as well as direct program support
allocations. Because of the 20% reduction in program support,
insufficient funds are available for dedicated, non-administrative
revenue which, under the Year 1 budget, allocated a substantial
amount to a matching grant fund for multi-family containers.
Individual revenue requirements of the franchised haulers for
program implementation are not shown, but would be reviewed in
individual County/city rate review studies.
Resource needs for fiscal year 1991-92 are projected in Appendix
A. Administrative costs for program development and implementation
are included. Although this plan covers only fiscal year 1991-92,
participating jurisdictions have discussed future revenue needs to
complete the remaining three years of the five-year plan. Consensus
between all participating jurisdictions would determine the type
and extent of programs included in each year's plan. The total cost
would be divided between each jurisdiction based on an equitable
formula. Each jurisdiction would then determine the most
appropriate revenue source to meet the commitment.
Because eleven jurisdictions are working cooperatively, determining
an equitable formula for funding the future programs can be a
lengthy process. Participating jurisdictions project that this
issue will be finalized within Year 2 of the plan.
If a 60% level of program support from Metro and the County is
assumed for Year 3, the $191,204 would cover existing staff
currently funded and committed to the waste reduction program.
Promotion and other waste reduction activities would have to be
funded from other sources. Under the anticipated policy, Years 4
& 5 would see even lower revenue commitments from Metro and the
County.
Figure 4 updates the local jurisdiction contact list. The
representatives of each local government provide waste reduction
program support, with the County providing the lead support in the
program.
12
Figure 4 Local Jurisdiction Information - Year 2
Contact
Person Phone Department Address
Washington County Bill Martin 648-8722 Health and 155 N. tet.
Recycling Coordinator Human Services Hillsboro, OR.97124
City of Beaverton Beth Erlendson 526-2487 Office of the P.O. Box 4755
Programs Coordinator Mayor Beaverton, OR.97076
City of Cornelius Jerry Taylor 357-9112 Administration 1355 N.Barlow
City Manager P.O. Box 607
Cornelius, OR.97113
City of Durham Roger Gano 639-6851 Administration 17160 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd.
City Administrator P.O. Box 23483
Durham, OR.97223
City of Forest Grove Jeff Heeksel 359-3234 City Manager's P.O.Box 326
Administrative Assistant Office Forest Grove, OR.
97116
City of Hillsboro Cecilia Petrocco 681-6205 Administration 123 West Main St.
Management Analyst Hillsboro, OR.
97123
City of King City George Morgan 639-4082 City Manager's 15300 SW 116th Ave.
City Manager Office King City, OR.97224
City of Sherwood James Rapp 625-5523 City Manager's 90 NW Park St.
City Manager Office Sherwood, OR.97140
City of Tigard Loreen Edin 639-4171 Administration P.O. Box 23397
Admin.Servcies Manager Office Tigard, OR.
City of Tualatin Emilie Kroen 692-2000 Operations P.O.Box 369
Administrative Assistant Tualatin,OR. 97062-0369
City of Wilsonville Tom Barthel 682-1011 Administration P.O. Box 220
Administrative Assistant Wilsonville, OR. 97070
13
WASTE REDUCTION GOALS - YEAR 2
Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham,
Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood, Tigard, Tualatin and
Wilsonville propose fourteen tasks to be completed within Year 2
of the Washington County Wasteshed Waste Reduction Plan. Metro
requires ten waste reduction tasks to be submitted by local
governments by July 1, 1991 to adhere to regional goals.
These fourteen tasks for Year 2 combined with the eleven tasks
outlined in Year 1 are a total of 25 tasks to be completed to
maintain compliance with the Metro "Annual Waste Reduction Program
for Local Government". Thirty-four separate tasks were required by
the Metro Waste Reduction Chapter of the RSWMP for completion
within the designated five years. Subsequent years continue to
require that additional waste reduction tasks be submitted for
approval to Metro by local governments.
Year 1 tasks were:
1 - Identify revenue sources to fund programs.
2 - Implement weekly recycling collection in neighborhoods.
3 - Prepare and schedule the implementation of a recycling
container collection system.
4 - Implement, by ordinance, resolution or administrative
rule of an institutional purchasing policy.
5 - Cooperate in reaching other regional goals as they are
developed in yard debris collection, material recovery,
and other resource recovery activities.
6 - Hire or designate staff to serve as a waste reduction
coordinator.
7 - Regulate all rates through either franchise or license
agreement.
8 - Incorporate variable rate/mini-can rates in the franchise
or license agreements.
9 - Implement office paper recycling programs in all
County/city buildings.
10 - Distribute multi-family collection containers.
11 - Write and submit Year 2 plan on time.
Year 2 adds the following tasks to the Five-Year Waste Reduction
Work Plan:
1 - Regulate residential garbage collection to ensure weekly
recycling with containers.
2 - Regulate commercial garbage collection to ensure
collection, waste audits and economic incentives.
3 - Regulate multi-family garbage collection to ensure
recycling incentives and cost recovery for service.
4 - Implement in-house recycling programs.
5 - Perform required number of waste audits and develop an
ongoing audit program.
14
•
6 - Develop school recycling programs while providing waste
audits.
7 - Develop design review language to facilitate recycling
and solid waste activities at new commercial
construction.
8 - Develop a plan to install recycling containers at multi-
family complexes.
9 - Implement yard debris collection equivalent to regional
plan requirements.
10- Complete Metro's Annual Report for Year 1.
11- Develop a plan for special waste collection.
12- Perform a study on intermediate processing and marketing
programs for selected recyclables.
13- Perform a rate analysis to ensure recycling incentives
and costs are provided.
14- Write and submit Year 3 plan on time.
The following items identify the Year 2 tasks with appropriate
descriptive analysis. The first ten items are noted (*) so as to
denote conformance to Metro's Year 2 minimum standards for local
governments. Washington County Wasteshed jurisdictions will
accomplish four additional tasks within the Year 2 to facilitate
the delivery of service to residents.
Task 1* - Regulate residential garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
the local government to fully implement a uniform
and comprehensive weekly curbside recycling program
with containers.
Regulation of residential garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions. Twenty-seven franchise
haulers in the County have a service certificate designated for
residential garbage collection areas. Rates are set by each local
jurisdiction. The twenty-three haulers listed in Figure 2 are
required by law to provide curbside recycling service to their
residential customers. Weekly curbside collection of recyclables
was implemented County-wide on February 1, 1991.
A new annual financial report was adopted by all participating
jurisdictions in 1990 to provide more comprehensive analysis of
service requirement costs. This form should be refined to address
new service standards and to specify haulers accounting of costs.
Establishing this comprehensive report form allows local
governments to fully account for the cost of service. Recycling
costs can then be structured into the rate to ensure adequate
return for service provided.
Page 1-35 of the Waste Reduction Chapter of the RSWMP states:
is
"Curbside Containers: Develop and implement residential
curbside container program. Based on the results of
Metro's pilot project, provide residents with containers
for storage and pick-up of recyclables. Specific
activities associated with this program include promotion
and education to inform citizens about the availability
of containers, setting up and ongoing program
administration. Implement monthly pick-up on the same day
as garbage collection. Introduce weekly pick-up on the
same day as collection, as feasible"
This program was to be implemented, when a financing mechanism was
identified. Metro has set the policy of support for the container
program at $3. 00 per single-family household. The remaining cost
requirements are to funded through local governments or through
local haulers.
Additionally, Metro has established that local jurisdictions are
to meet the standard of providing a minimum of a 14-gallon capacity
container to each single, duplex, triplex, four-plex and multi-
family unit receiving individualized service. In the Washington
County Wasteshed, this figure totals 80, 000 units.
The full accounting of recycling program costs is integral to the
establishment of a container standard by each local jurisdiction.
As of February 1, 1991, all haulers providing recycling service
within the Metro District boundary implemented weekly, same day as
garbage, curbside collection of recyclables. Only the Cities of
Tualatin and Wilsonville have implemented the container program.
All of Clackamas County and the Cities of Gresham, Wood Village,
Troutdale, Fairview and Portland have each identified and begun
purchasing containers for their programs. All of these
jurisdictions have designated the 14-gallon bin as their system to
implement.
Implementation of the container program for all jurisdictions
within the Washington County Wasteshed has been identified as a
priority task for Year 2 . The existing container programs, within
the Cities of Tualatin and Wilsonville and in unincorporated
Washington County within the franchise collection areas of
Rossman's Sanitary Service . and United Disposal Service, meet
Metro's standards. These programs utilize the single 14-gallon
"blue box" for collection. This type- of service will continue in
these areas, accounting for approximately 10% of the population
within the Washington County Wasteshed.
Washington County has set the service standard for the
unincorporated County haulers. The County has designated a 14-
gallon bin as the standard for the reasons shown below.
16
Containers: Advantages of 14 Gallon Bins
Initial Cost - The initial cost ($2 .97/bin) is $.63 less
expensive than a bucket system, based on a
volume of 80, 000 households. As the volume
purchase goes down, bins remain the same price
because of purchase agreements with the City
of Portland. Bucket system costs will be
significantly higher because of smaller volume
purchases.
Replacement Cost - A 10% replacement rate is expected for lost
and stolen containers. With the entire region
purchasing the same bin system, a bulk order
for all jurisdictions each year will allow
significant savings over a small order for
bucket replacement. Additionally, each hauler
has to maintain an inventory to replace or
provide new containers. Costs of inventory for
two or more systems are higher for haulers may
have to maintain both buckets and bins.
Uniformity - To date, the entire Metro region has selected
the 14-gallon bin system for distribution. This
uniformity would allow Metro and County
promotion to be directed toward one system.
With the installation of more than one system,
effectiveness of eduction programs is
diminished.
Handling - Public acceptance of a system is critical in
realizing higher participation rates. The City
of Tualatin has two years experience with bins
and has over an 80% participation rate
according to DEQ, indicating a wide public
acceptance. For hauler handling times, a study
in the City of Santa Barbara found bins to be
6% faster for haulers to unload.
Future Growth - Recycling is expanding to increase the amount
of materials and volumes recycled. The City of
Portland and Tualatin are adding two more
materials to their curbside program, with
Portland distributing two bins to households
to handle the increase. The bins appear to have
the advantage in accommodating program growth.
Because the two primary issues of cost and regional uniformity,
Washington County has selected bins for the unincorporated areas,
even though the Year 1 plan had designated the three 5-gallon
bucket system as preferred by the haulers. The Cities of Beaverton,
17
Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood,
and Tigard should determine the most appropriate container system
for their community.
Appendix C projects program costs on a County-wide basis with all
jurisdictions using bins. Figures are based on Clackamas County
and City of Gresham experience in implementing the container
program. With amortized cost of equipment over a seven-year time
frame, total revenue requirements exceed $1 million per year.
Each City Council should evaluate their container needs with the
following considerations. Washington County will be purchasing bins
through the City of Portland bid. The County will receive the bid
price ($2.97/ea) that Portland received. Further, the County bins
will meet the standards for recycled content and delivery the City
of Portland required.
If a city selects a different container system, that city will
determine the purchasing method and standards to be implemented.
The $3 . 60/unit for a three-bucket system was quoted on the
assumption that the bid would include an order of 210, 000 buckets.
The price can be anticipated to be much higher per unit for a
significantly smaller order.
Promotion of a uniform system provides for cost efficiencies and
more effectiveness to the residents. Metro and the County will
provide promotion of the container system to local residents. While
the County will provide general promotion for the entire Wasteshed,
as the number container systems used within the Wasteshed
increases, County-wide effectiveness of the promotion diminishes,
requiring each city to supplement specific promotion on their
container system.
Task 2* - Regulate commercial garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
the local government to implement a uniform
commercial waste audit and recycling program that
includes collection standards, waste audits and
economic incentives.
Regulation of commercial garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions. Twenty-seven franchise
haulers in the County have a service certificate designated for
commercial garbage collection areas. Rates are set by each local
jurisdiction. Twenty-seven haulers are required bylaw to provide
recycling service to their commercial customers.
The "Opportunity to Recycle Act" through the State of Oregon OAR
340-60-020 (1) (a) requires at least:
18
" . . . . , on route collection at least once a month of
source separated recyclable material from collection
service customers within the urban growth boundary
established by a metropolitan service district. "
Currently, commercial recycling has not been fully developed by
local governments. Priority has been placed on residential
recycling for revenue and staff time. The commercial sector has
the potential for the largest share and most cost effective
recycling compared to residential and multi-family recycling. While
a full commercial recycling plan is anticipated in Year 3 of the
Five Year Waste Reduction Plan, preliminary work is important to
establish uniform standards for each jurisdiction.
In a recent residential study conducted by the Association of
Oregon Recyclers (AOR) and the Oregon Sanitary Service Institute
(OSSI) , four single-family residential curbside recycling services
were evaluated for participation and cost of each program. In these
programs the market sale of collected recyclables covered only 6. 6%
- 16% of the cost of collection. If capital costs are included with
collection costs, recyclables covered 5.6% - 13 .6% of the total
cost of the program.
The 90% average revenue subsidy that exists in these four recycling
programs is being provided by garbage customers through higher
rates. Policy decisions support the acceptance of such a subsidy
for recycling. While a "free" recycling service has been
established for single-family residents, Washington County and the
participating cities will set the policy that commercial recycling
not be established as a "free" service.
The AOR/OSSI report may not translate directly to similar overall
costs in commercial recycling, especially when higher value items
such as cardboard and metal are included. However, if franchised
haulers are expected to provide recycling service after the readily
marketable materials have been removed by private non-regulated
recyclers, a recycling rate subsidy can be expected.
It is difficult to balance the need to finance the commercial
recycling program with the desire to provide sufficient incentives
to encourage participation. The AOR/OSSI survey reports that the
most cost-effective recycling program has a net cost of $210/ton.
By comparison, the average cost of garbage collection in the Metro
region is $143/ton. This amounts to a $67/ton subsidy to recycling
after material sale revenue ($34/ton) is deducted. While single-
family residential curbside recycling accounts for only 7% of all
material recycled, local rates can continue to justify this
subsidy.
Each local government has authority over the rates within their
jurisdiction. A consistent policy of recycling incentives needs to
be established to guide local rate setting. State law allows a
19
charge for recycling service with any charge for recycling less
than the charge for an equivalent amount of garbage.
Additionally, the Technical Committee recommends to the policy
makers of Washington County and the participating cities that they
establish recycling service rates for commercial accounts,
appropriate to the service requirements. The hauler would retain
the revenue from the market sale of the recyclables.
It is important that the precedent be established that commercial
recycling is not "free. " The annual review of financial reports
would evaluate the effectiveness of meeting the revenue
requirements of the program while assuring an equitable incentive
for recycling participation.
As with all service standards established by local governments for
their franchised haulers, adequate cost accounting for those
services is important. The adopted common Annual Financial Report
of the franchised haulers will reflect the cost of service for this
standard. Subsequent upgraded report forms should continue to
include these cost centers for proper cost accounting to service
levels.
Private commercial sector recycling companies operating in
Washington County are not regulated under the franchise code and
subsequently are not required to report their recycling level of
activity. As State law mandates goals and standards upon local
governments, it may be necessary to regulate these private
recyclers under provisions of the State law.
Under the provisions of Year 1, County staff would develop a
commercial waste audit program in anticipation of requirements
under the remaining five-year plan. This task is still in
implementation and will be ready prior to the initiation of Year
2. Under terms of the proposed Senate Bill 66, commercial waste
audits may be a mandatory program for businesses. Until the
legislative intent is clear, it is premature to design a full waste
audit program.
To reach the required Metro goal, County staff will provide by
March 15, 1992 a waste audit of one percent of the commercial
accounts or ten commercial waste audits, whichever is less in each
local jurisdiction. Franchised haulers will provide to the County
the number of commercial accounts by jurisdiction by September 15,
1991.
Currently, companies handling large volumes of hazardous waste are
complying with recent legislation in developing a hazardous waste
reduction plan for their operations. These same companies are
looking at their overall waste stream and finding solutions to
their solid waste disposal problems as well as hazardous waste
disposal. Many consulting companies have entered this area and
20
• •
any business or individual may provide a waste audit program to
the commercial sector.
Private recycling companies as well as franchised collection
companies within the County may offer waste audits to the
commercial sector. Since neither of these providers is required to
report to the County concerning audit results, the County will
provide waste audits to ensure that the participating jurisdictions
meet the Metro required numbers completed.
The results of the first year of waste audits will be reviewed to
determine the success of the program. Adjustments to the program
will be recommended as appropriate. Further, changes will be
instituted to comply with Legislative intent as rules are adopted
to any new statute provisions.
These changes to the waste audit program as well as a full
commercial recycling plan will be incorporated into Year 3 of the
Waste Reduction Plan. Draft language of Year 3 will be ready for
local jurisdictional review by March 22 , 1992.
Task 3* - Regulate multi-family garbage collection through
franchise, license, or other means that will enable
local government to implement a multi-family
recycling program that gives apartment
owners/managers an economic incentive to promote
recycling while allowing haulers to recover the
costs of providing recycling services.
Regulation of multi-family garbage collection is fully implemented
throughout Washington County jurisdictions currently through the
commercial rates. Twenty-seven franchise haulers in the County have
a service certificate designated for multi-family garbage
collection areas. Rates are set by each local jurisdiction. Twenty-
three haulers are required by law to provide recycling service to
their multi-family customers.
Washington County, in cooperation with the Cities of Beaverton,
Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood,
Tigard, Tualatin and Wilsonville has approved intergovernmental
agreements designating the County as the grant administrator for
all local jurisdictions for multi-family recycling.
The total revenue dedicated in Year 1 ($163 , 192) allowed siting a
minimum of 90 depots. With a total of 40,423 multi-family
residential units, this represents approximately one quarter of
the complexes in Washington County. The franchised haulers will
continue to act as the implementing agents in their respective
franchise areas.
21
The options for service available to each franchise hauler are:
1. For haulers with small complexes (up to 30 units) or with
a small number of complexes (under 5) , an individual
container per each unit may be distributed with curbside
collection within the complex parking lot.
2 . For all other haulers, a system of roller carts with
automated collection will be encouraged. All mini-depot
type collection presents technical problems involving
contamination. This issue can be addressed by the
addition of post-collection screening and will be studied
in Task #12 . At present, improved manager and tenant
preparation eduction are the tools available to address
this problem. Option #3 may substitute as an acceptable
service standard until the contamination problem is
resolved.
3. As an alternative to option #2, haulers may use a system
based on 32 gallon cans. Container enclosures will be
encouraged that are acceptable to both the hauler and the
complex manager/owners, that are uniform throughout the
County, and can be adapted to a cart-service-based
operation in the future.
Figure #5 shows the distribution of multi-family units by franchise
area and the number of depots per hauler that will be installed
under the Year 1 program. For those haulers under option #1 in the
above service standards, the alternative number of individual
containers is listed.
Haulers providing recycling service under option #3 are responsible
for demonstrating that their selected container system meets the
service levels set by the local governments as well as the needs
of the complex owners/managers. They also should balance the cost
of individual depot requirements per complex with the number of
depots sited. A Work Group consisting of haulers and Technical
Committee members will approve appropriate enclosure designs to
ensure uniformity and future adaptability.
Under Year 1, haulers are responsible for setting their own depot
site selection criteria for establishing depots with review by
their local governments. The County provided to the haulers a list
of multi-family complexes that have indicated a desire to
participate in the recycling program. Haulers will contact these
complexes first and list in their report to the County why
recycling service was not provided. With the installation of 90
depots or an equivalent number of depots and individual containers,
nothing precludes each franchise hauler from servicing
depots/containers provided by complex owners that meet the
appropriate standards.
22
Figure 5
Multi-Family Recycling WASHINGTON COUNTY WASTESHED
Five Year Waste Reduction Plan
Year 1
Program for Fiscal Year 1990.91
Or
Estimated Washington
Metro Estimated# #Units with County
Revenue Depots with Individual Revenue Local
Multi-Family Grant Revenue Revenue per Dedicated to 32 Gallon Containers for Multi-Family Hauler
Company Units per Unit Company Containers System B• System F" Recycling Revenue
Aloha Garbage Comp. 3,900 $3.30 $12,868.85 $6,434.43 9 1,139 $6,434.43 $2,875.87
Cedar Mill Disposal 620 $3.30 $2,045.82 $1,022.91 1 181 $1,022.91 $457.19
Cornelius Disposal 137 $3.30 $452.06 $226.03 0 40 $226.03 $101.02
Doe's Sanitary Serv. 330 $3.30 $1,088.90 $544.45 1 96 $544.45 $243.34
Don's Garbage Serv. 380 $3.30 $1,253.89 $626.94 1 111 $626.94 $280.21
Eager Beaver Sanit. 1,134 $3.30 $3,741.87 $1,870.93 3 331 $1,870.93 $836.21
Forest Grove Disp. 1,450 $3.30 $4,784.57 $2,392.29 3 423 $2,392.29 $1,069.23
Garbarino Disposal . 2,564 $3.30 $8,460.45 $4,230.22 6 749 . $4,230.22 $1,890.70
Hillsboro Garbage . 2,095 $3.30 $6,912.88 $3,456.44 5 612 $3,456.44 $1,544.86
Miller's Sanitary Serv. 3,416 $3.30 $11,271.79 $5,635.90 8 998 $5,635.90 $2,518.97
Pacific Garbage Serv. 1,113 $3.30 $3,672.57 $1,836.29 2 325 $1,836.29 $820.73
Pride Disposal 3,300 $3.30 $10,889.03 $5,444.51 7 964 $5,444.51 $2,433.43
Public Sanitary Serv. 1,287 $3.30 $4,246.72 $2,123.36 3 376 $2,123.36 1949.04
Rossman's Sanitary 150 $3.30 $494.96 $247.48 0 44 $247.48 $110.61
Schmidt Sanitary Serv. 1,200 $3.30 $3,959.65 $1,979.82 3 350 $1,979.82 $884.88
Sevier&Son 130 $3.30 $428.96 $214.48 0 38 $214.48 $95.86
United Disposal Serv. 4,740 $3.30 $15,640.60 $7,820.30 11 1,384 $7,820.30 $3,495.29
Valley Garbage Serv. 1,934 $3.30 $6,381.63 $3,190.82 4 565 $3,190.82 $1,426.14
Valley West Refuse 202 $3.30 $666.54 $333.27 0 59 $333.27 $148.96
Walker Garbage Serv. 1,975 $3.30 $6,516.92 $3,258.46 4 577 $3,258.46 $1,456.37
West Beaverton Sanit. 7,996 $3.30 $26,384.45 $13,192.22 18 2,335 $13,192.22 $5,896.27
West Slope Garbage 370 $3.30 $1,220.89 $610.45 1 108 $610.45 $272.84
Total 40,423 $133,384.00 $66,692.00 90 11,804 $66,692.00 $29,808.00
Revenue Sources Estimated Container System Costs (see Attachment A)
Washington County Gran $66,692.00 System A $880.00
Metro Multi-Family Grant $66,692.00 System A2 $979.00
Franchised Haulers ($29,808.00) System B• $740.00
System C $420.00
Sub-Total $133,384.00 System C2 $430.00
Total $163,192.00 System D $134.00
System D2 $185.00
System E $120.00
System F'` $5.65
System G $5.65
23
•
It is difficult to balance the need to finance the multi-family
recycling program with the desire to provide sufficient incentives
to encourage participation. Although performed on single-family
recycling programs, the AOR/OSSI survey reports that recycling
amounts to approximately a $67/ton subsidy after material sale
revenue ($34/ton) is deducted. Similar material mix to single-
family recycling would imply that multi-family recycling would
incur similar costs.
As with commercial collection, each local government has authority
over the rates within its jurisdiction. A consistent policy of
recycling incentives should be established for each
collection sector to guide local rate setting. State law allows a
charge for recycling service with any charge for recycling less
than the charge for an equivalent amount of garbage.
Washington County and the participating cities recognize that
service levels within the multi-family sector may be substantially
different than service levels within the commercial sector. The
majority of multi-family residents are included within the
commercial container rate schedule, while a small number of multi-
family complexes have individual unit waste collection.
For multi-family complexes on commercial container rates, the
Technical Committee recommends to the policy makers of Washington
County and the participating cities that a separate multi-family
rate be reviewed for establishment. The Technical Committee
recommends an that a recycling charge be reviewed for adoption. The
hauler would retain the revenue from the market sale of the
recyclables.
It is important that the precedent be established that multi-family
commercial recycling is not "free" . A charge for multi-family
commercial recycling would be reviewed and subject to change
annually during the rate review process. The review would evaluate
the effectiveness of meeting the revenue requirements of the
program while assuring an equitable incentive for recycling
participation.
The minimum materials at this time to be collected under the multi-
family recycling program consist of source-separated green glass,
brown glass, clear glass, tin cans, cardboard and newspaper. The
intent is to provide the largest number of depots with the limited
revenue that is available. By limiting the size of each depot and
consequently the number of materials collected, the individual
depot cost and subsequent collection cost can be minimized.
Other principal recyclable materials (aluminum, ferrous metal, non-
ferrous metal, high grade paper) are limited in volume and do not
justify a container for collection at this time. Yard debris is
more typically handled by landscape maintenance companies under
contract with multi-family complexes and is best handled through
24
yard debris depots established in Washington County.
During Year 1, the multi-family recycling program will not target
a particular size or type of complex. Emphasis will instead be
placed on continuing to work with interested parties. Washington
County and the participating cities will rely on the franchised
haulers to implement the multi-family recycling program within
their respective areas.
Washington County, through signed intergovernmental agreements with
each of the participating cities, will continue to act as agent in
the planning and implementation of the program. The County will
provide oversight to ensure proper implementation of the approved
recycling service standards by the franchised haulers. Required
program reports will be compiled and submitted by the County.
Washington County provides education and promotion for the multi-
family recycling program. At a minimum, the County will produce
and make available a brochure on multi-family recycling suitable
for tenants. The County will produce and make available a form
letter and information packet for manager/owners to assist them in
setting up and maintaining recycling service at their complex.
Although Year 1 of the multi-family recycling program only
allocated revenue for approximately one-quarter of the complexes
in the Wasteshed, provisions for recycling at the remaining
complexes needs to be recognized. However, with an estimated
revenue requirement of $250, 000, supplying depots/individualized
containers for all multi-family complexes is an expensive
proposition. Currently, priority has been established within the
Wasteshed for available revenue to be dedicated to residential
recycling.
The budget as approved by the local governments and as submitted
to Metro identified costs based on a full fiscal year. The cities
did not complete approval of Year 1 until December 1, 1990. Metro
did not distribute the "Challenge" Grant revenue until February
1991. Washington County established a waste reduction account as
of January 1, 1991 and, with one exception, assigned staff to the
waste reduction program as of that date.
The Metro grant allows the Year 1 programs to be implemented and
funded through September 30, 1991, or only seven full months. The
Year 2 Metro "Challenge" Grant and programs described will not
begin full implementation until October 1991. This start date means
a nine month budget year for 1991-92 while budget costs are again
shown on a full twelve-month fiscal year.
It can be anticipated that each year will require a budget
adjustment to properly account for these two short fiscal years.
The surplus revenue made available through a budget adjustment will
be prioritized to be distributed to the franchise haulers for the
25
purchase of additional depot/individual containers.
Figure 6 shows this adjusted budget priority with an anticipated
allocation in November 1991 of $53, 354 of County/city waste
reduction revenue. Additionally, Metro again funded, at a reduced
level, the Multi-Family Recycling Program. This money, it
distributed on a per capita basis will add an additional $10,971.73
to the Wasteshed's multi-family container purchase program. While
Year 1 required that Metro grant funds be dedicated to container
purchases, Year 2 would require all funds to be dedicated to
container purchases.
26
Figure 6
Multi-Family Recycling WASHINGTON COUNTY WASTESHED
(Anticipated Adjusted Budget Priority) Five Year Waste Reduction Plan
Year 2
Program for Fiscal Year 1991-92
Or
Washington Estimated
County Estimated # #Units with
Total Revenue Depots with Individual Local
Multi-Family Grant Revenue Revenue per Dedicated to 32 Gallon Containers Hauler
Company Units per Unit Company Containers System B • System F" Revenue
Aloha Garbage Company 3,900 $1.59 $7,593.04 $6,206.13 8 1,098 $1,386.92
Cedar Mill Disposal 620 $1.59 $1,207.10 $986.62 1 175 $220.48
Cornelius Disposal 137 $1.59 $266.73 $218.01 0 39 $48.72
Dee's Sanitary Service 330 $1.59 $642.49 $525.13 1 93 $117.35
Don's Garbage Service 380 $1.59 $739.84 $604.70 1 107 $135.14
Eager Beaver Sanitary 1,134 $1.59 $2,207.82 $1,804.55 2 319 $403.27
Forest Grove Disposal 1,450 $1.59 $2,823.05 $2,307.41 3 408 $515.65
Garbarino Disposal Service 2,564 $1.59 $4,991.94 $4,080.13 6 722 $911.81
Hillsboro Garbage Disposal 2,095 $1.59 $4,078.83 $3,333.81 5 590 $745.02
Miller's Sanitary Service 3,416 $1.59 $6,650.73 $5,435.93 7 962 $1,214.80
Pacific Garbage Service 1,113 $1.59 $2,166.94 $1,771.13 2 313 $395.80
Pride Disposal 3,300 $1.59 $6,424.88 $5,251.34 7 929 $1,173.54
Public Sanitary Service 1,287 $1.59 $2,505.70 $2,048.02 3 362 $457.68
Roseman's Sanitary Service 150 $1.59 $292.04 $238.70 0 42 $53.34
Schmidt Sanitary Service 1,200 $1.59 $2,336.32 $1,909.58 3 338 $426.74
Sevier&Son 130 $1.59 $253.10 $206.87 0 37 $46.23
United Disposal Service 4,740 $1.59 $9,228.47 $7,542.83 10 1,335 $1,685.64
Valley Garbage Service 1,934 $1.59 $3,765.37 $3,077.60 4 545 $687.77
Valley West Refuse Disp. 202 $1.59 $393.28 $321.45 0 57 $71.84
Walker Garbage Service 1,975 $1.59 $3,845.20 $3,142.85 4 556 $702.35
West Beaverton Sanitary 7,996 $1.59 $15,567.69 $12,724.16 17 2,252 $2,843.53
West Slope Garbage 370 $1.59 $720.37 $588.79 1 104 $131.58
Total 40,423 $78,700.93 $64,325.73 87 11,385 $14,375.20
Revenue Sources Estimated Container System Costs
Washington County Grant $53,354.00 System A $880.00
Metro Multi-Family Grant $10,971.73 Syatem A2 $979.00
Franchised Haulers ($14,375.20) System B' $740.00
System C $420.00
Sub-total $64,325.73 System C2 $430.00
Total $78,700.93 System D $134.00
System D2 $185.00
System E $120.00
System F'• $5.65
System G $5.65
27
Task 4* - Implement in-house recycling programs to include as
many materials as practical at all city and county
facilities.
The participating jurisdictions developed a model purchasing and
waste reduction policy under Year 1 that is being adopted by the,
governing bodies with appropriate changes. This model policy
addressed management procedures for most common materials
associated with local governments. The adoption and implementation
status of this policy by each local government will be dealt with
in the Year 1 Annual Report Worksheet. A copy is available for
review.
Task 5* - Expand local expertise on the part of haulers,
recyclers, and/or local recycling coordinators to
perform commercial waste audits for a variety of
different kinds of businesses. Document the
completion of, at a minimum, ten commercial waste
audits or waste audits for one percent of the
businesses in the commercial sector, whichever is
less. Develop a plan for a more comprehensive
commercial waste audit program to be implemented in
year three.
See Task #2 (Commercial Collection) for full explanation of the
waste audit program.
Task 6* - Provide schools the opportunity to participate in
waste audits and encourage them to implement waste
reduction and recycling programs.
Washington County has provided a County-wide school education
program since 1988. The program has increased the scope of school
education starting with classroom presentations and moving to
assistance in the establishment of in-house recycling activities.
During the past two years, more than 10, 000 children have
participated in school-based recycling programs sponsored by the
County. County staff have provided expertise as requested from
schools and districts to initiate school paper recycling. Many
schools needed little help, while others required significant staff
time in establishing programs.
As part of the Year 2 work activities, County staff will conduct
a survey of all schools in Washington County to determine the
status of recycling. The survey will include the extent of the
recycling activities, the materials collected and other pertinent
information. A list will be made with a special emphasis on schools
28
that have not yet implemented recycling, with a plan to assist
these schools in full program development.
Task 7* - Begin developing language to insert into design
review and/or site plan review procedures to,
facilitate the incorporation of recycling at
commercial facilities and multi-family dwelling
units.
Requiring adequate facilities for new construction to accommodate
recycling has been a goal of the Technical Committee from its
inception. The Committee has additionally set the goal of including
design standards for solid waste facilities in all new construction
to ensure economical and accessible collection service by the
franchised hauler.
The Technical Committee will establish a Design Review Work Group
with the participating jurisdictions designating their
building/planning officials or designates as representatives with
representation from the hauling industry. This work group will
develop model language for each city/County to adopt during Year
Two. The Committee has set the goal of adopting model language
across all eleven jurisdictions to ensure more effective compliance
by the designers/contractors that will be required to meet the
standard. The Committee has set February 1, 1992 for completion of
the model language.
Task 8* - Develop a plan to install recycling container
systems in multi-family residential units.
See Task #3 (Multi-Family Collection) for full explanation of the
multi-family recycling plan.
Task 9* - Plan and implement a yard debris collection program
that meets at least the minimum requirements of the
regional yard debris recycling plan.
In November, 1989, Washington County Wasteshed received approval
from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for its yard
debris recycling plan. Metro's Regional Yard Debris Plan set
parameters for compliance that are within the program scope of the
Washington County plan. The County plan is presently being
implemented in accordance with the goals that were set for the
participating jurisdictions.
The County plan designates five public depots located strategically
29
throughout the County. Sites in Forest Grove, Hillsboro, Tualatin
and Beaverton/Garden Home are all operational on a regular
schedule. The fifth site in North Beaverton, near the Sunset
Corridor, has been determined and the City of Beaverton is issuing
a Request for Proposal to designate an operator. The timeline calls
for this depot to be operational by November 1991. The commercial
depot is operational and located to the west of Tigard.
The "Yard Debris Report" for 1990 reported to DEQ that the County
had reached the State required level of yard debris recycling of
at least 40% of the yard debris generated within the County. With
the four operational depots, one commercial depot and on-call
curbside service, the participating jurisdictions recovered 39. 6%.
% of Plan
1990 Projected
Collection Totals Totals
On-call Curbside Collection 162 tons N.A.
Commercial Only Depot 742 N.A.
Forest Grove Depot 3 1%
Hillsboro Depot 835 24%
Beaverton Depot N.A. 0%
Tualatin Depot 8,537 203%
Beaverton/Garden Home Depot 795 45
11,074 tons 79%
The second year of full implementation of the Wasteshed yard debris
plan will emphasize bringing the Beaverton Depot on-line and
incorporating the Hillsboro Landfill into the depot system as
required by DEQ. Better promotion of the availability of a depot
in Forest Grove should enhance the utilization of that facility.
In addition, more coordination on the on-call curbside service by
the haulers is necessary for the full success of the program.
Local jurisdictions initially set standards for collection of on-
call curbside service of yard debris at a minimum container size
of 10 cubic yards. In addition, the collection rate was set at the
same cost of drop box service delivery but with the cost of yard
debris disposal instead of the cost of waste disposal.
The Technical Committee recommends a change that establishes a
charge of one-half the cost of drop box service plus the cost of
disposal of the yard debris at a local recycler. With only 1.5% of
the yard debris recycled originating from curbside service, the
incentive to recycle yard debris should be enhanced.
Changes to the original yard debris recycling plan reflect changing
community needs. In the original plan, the City of Durham initiated
fee supported, weekly curbside yard debris recycling in March 1990.
The City of Tualatin will initiate, in October 1991, weekly
curbside yard debris recycling to all customers. The service will
30
be the first in the State of Oregon to offer roller carts and
automated collection for yard debris.
The City of Wilsonville was not an original participant of the
Washington County Wasteshed Yard Debris Plan. It will be necessary
to address yard debris recycling for the residents of Wilsonville,,
County staff will work with Wilsonville staff and the franchise
hauler to set options for the city. These options will be presented
to the Washington County Waste Reduction Technical Committee for
review.
Task 10*- Complete an Annual Report Worksheet for year one of
the Program. Submit this worksheet to Metro by
September 30, 1991.
Washington County, acting in its capacity as program administrator,
will submit, on behalf of the participating jurisdictions, the
Annual Report Worksheet as required by Metro. The Technical
Committee will review the County's work during the month of
September before the worksheet is submitted.
Task 11 - Develop a plan for special waste collection.
The approval by Metro Council of the Special Waste Chapter to the
Regional Solid Waste Management Plan presented local governments
with a dilemma. Because Metro designated special waste as part of
the overall waste reduction program in reaching the 56% goal, local
governments were obligated to consider special waste in local waste
reduction program goals. Washington County participating
jurisdictions should determine the best approach to handle this
wastestream while realizing the potential affect of this material
on overall goals.
The items included in the chapter with the Metro estimated volumes
of each material group are:
Material Volume
Construction and Demolition Debris 240,900 tons
Land Clearing Debris 18, 600
Non-Hazardous Industrial Waste Sludges 2,700
Non-Hazardous Industrial Waste Dusts 900
Non-Hazardous Industrial Waste Ash 20
Sewage Grit and Screenings 5, 300
Non-Hazardous Petroleum Sludge 550
Soils Contaminated with Petroleum Products 40, 000
Asbestos Wastes 1 , 600
Total 310, 570 tons
31
r -
With the total municipal waste (MSW) generated in the Metro region
at 1.2 million tons, these special wastes represent 25% more waste
that had not been fully accounted for previously. Traditionally,
these wastes have been hauled by special waste haulers and disposed
of at special waste landfills. Much of this operation has been
conducted outside the franchise hauler system.
With adoption of the Special Waste Chapter, Metro has identified
processing and disposal options for each of these wastes. Metro
further identifies the need to assure adequate flow to the
designated processors and disposal facilities.
Although permitted under existing State franchise laws, local
governments have not fully regulated the collection of special
waste. The Technical Committee has designated a Special Waste Work
Group, consisting of special waste haulers and Committee members,
and work has been initiated on development of a special waste
collection plan with draft completion for full Committee review by
January 1992.
The special wastes as outlined by Metro consist of 83%
construction, demolition and land clearing debris. A large portion
of this material is recyclable. A growing portion is presently
recycled at three Washington County facilities: Lakeside
Reclamation near Tigard, Hillsboro Landfill near Hillsboro and
Grimm's Fuel in Tualatin. Figures 7 and 8 show the composition of
these three wastes.
32
• •
Figure 7 Construction and Demo Debris
Paper
Plastic
Yard Debris
Misc. Inorganic
Wood
Metal
Total Tons - 203,000
Misc. Organic Textile
Source: Metro Special Waste Chapter
Figure 8 Land Clearing Waste
Contamination
Rocks
Soil
Bulky Wood
Total Tons - 18,600
Yard Waste Source: Metro Special Waste Chapter
33
Figure 9 shows the 1990 breakdown by the three hauler types
utilizing the two County landfills, Lakeside and Hillsboro. As
shown, franchised Washington County haulers account for a minority
of the use at these two facilities. Special waste haulers and non-
Washington County haulers constitute 59% of the material disposed
at these two facilities. All of this information will be reviewed
in the process of determining the appropriateness of fully
regulating special waste collection.
Figure 9 Special & Solid Wastes Produced Outside Washington County
(Estimated)
Presently
Washington Co. Non-Regulated
Washington County Franchised Special Waste Non-Wash. Co.
Landfills Haulers SW Haulers Haulers SW
in Tons in Tons in Tons
Hillsboro Landfill 37% 38% 25%
145,800 tons 53,946 55,404 36,450
Lakeside Landfill 50% 42% 8%
68,500 tons 34,250 28,770 5,480
Total 88,196 84,174 41,930
Task 12 - Perform a feasibility study on an intermediate
processing and marketing program of residential,
multi-family and commercial recycled materials.
Metro released the "Policy and Technical Analysis for: The
Washington County System Plan" in April, 1991. This analysis was
the culmination of two years of work by the Washington County Solid
Waste Systems Design Steering Committee to develop local
recommendations for solid waste management in the County. Metro
provided the analysis to the "Concept Plan" provided by the County
Committee.
34
Included in the full analysis were twelve issues with policy
recommendations for the Metro Council to adopt. Policy Question
#5 was: "How should high-grade waste be managed within the
Washington County System?"
High-grade waste is:
" a substream of the general-purpose waste stream. It is
defined as substantially uncontaminated loads of
recyclable materials that could be recovered
economically. It is estimated that high-grade loads will
contain an average of 70% recyclable materials. "
Figure 10 shows the Metro projected high-grade waste for the
County. At a minimum, any high-grade facility would need to be
sized to handle 65, 000 tons per year.
Figure 10 High Grade Waste Projection for Washington County
Total Total Total
Wash. Co. Recoverable Residual Projected
Non-Residential High Grade High Grade High Grade
Year Waste Waste Waste Waste
1990 159,661 22,353 9,580 31,932
1995 195,940 27,432 11,756 39,188
2000 230,084 32,212 13,805 46,017
2005 266,910 37,367 16,015 53,382
2010 306,417 42,898 18,385 61,283
Source: Metro
The assumptions used to determine these numbers are that commercial
waste accounts for half the general purpose waste (GPW) , that
twenty percent of commercial waste could be diverted for high-grade
processing and that seventy percent of material processed could be
recycled. The formula is:
.5 GPW X 20% Diversion X 70% Recovery = Total HG Recycled
Evaluated in the overall waste reduction system, high—grade
35
recycling offers a substantial amount of waste diverted material.
Figure 11 demonstrates the effect that each portion the waste
reduction program has on the overall goal of a 50% waste reduction
by the year 2000. Shown are actual numbers for residential, yard
debris, special waste and other recycling. Other recycling is a
prorated number assigned by the State for material recycled through-
private recycling companies and includes paper buyback and bottle
deposit programs. The high-grade number is projected and taken from
�I
Metro's Washington County System Analysis Report.
Figure 11 Washington County Waste Reduction Programs
(estimates as of 1990)
Actual & Percent
Potential of Total
Tons Percent Waste
Program Recycled of Total Reduction
in 1990 Wastestream Program
Residential Curbside 13,346 4.18% 8.36%
Multi-Family Curbside 0 0.00% 0.00%
Commercial Curbside 0 0.00% 0.00%
Yard Debris Recycling 11,074 3.47% 6.94%
High-Grade Recycling 22,353 7.00% 14.00%
Special Waste Recycling 11,077 3.47% 6.94%
Other Recycling 53,823 16.86% 33.71%
Future Recycling 47,988 15.03% 30.06%
159,661 50.00'6 100.00%
The multi-family and commercial recycling programs are too new to
have accurate counts of material recycled. Yard debris recycling
includes the County approved depots and curbside collection of yard
debris. Special waste recycling accounts for the construction,
demolition and land clearing material that is being processed and
recycled presently in the County.
other recycling is an extrapolation from DEQ numbers that account
for non-regulated recycling that takes place within the County.
This number includes the bottle-bill program and the private paper
buy-back facilities such as Far West Fiber and Weyerhaeuser. The
high-grade tonnage was added to show the effect if a facility had
been operational in 1990.
36
Figure 12 shows graphically the effect each waste reduction program
has on the overall County waste reduction goal. It is evident that
a high-grade facility can have a significant effect on the overall
program results.
Figure 12 TOTAL WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM
Residential
Curbside
Yard Debris Recycling
Future Expansion
High-Grade
r Recycling
Special Waste
Recycling
NOT SHOWN:
Multi-Family Recycling
Commercial Recycling Other Recycling Total: 159,661 tons
The Technical Committee is concerned that the implementation of
the system plan be compatible with other components of the overall
waste reduction program. The analysis provides the Metro Council
with two policy options. The stated preferred option is:
"A high-grade facility should be procured as a component
of the Washington County solid waste system. The decision
as to whether or not the high-grade function should take
place at a separate facility or at a transfer station
should be made during the procurement process. "
The procurement of a high-grade facility in Washington County has
the potential to address three areas of concern to waste reduction
programs already implemented or being contemplated in the near
future. The Technical Committee wants these three concerns
37
addressed before high-grade facility specifications are determined.
The first concern of the Committee deals with the expanding number
of items that the public must source separate for placement at the
curb for collection. Further, these items are then to be kept
separated by the franchised hauler during curbside collection.
Specifically, nine items are required by DEQ for curbside
collection in the County. Glass has to be separated by color to be
marketed, thus glass is listed three times. Yard debris, although
currently a principal recyclable, will be required to be a weekly
curbside recyclable by July 1994. At present in Washington County
local jurisdictions, the principal recyclable items are:
1. Cardboard 7. Tin Cans
2. Newspapers 8. Ferrous Metal
3 . High Grade Paper 9. Glass (Green)
4. Aluminum 10. Glass (Clear)
5. Motor Oil 11. Glass (Brown
6. Non-Ferrous Metal 12. Yard Debris
13. Plastic (HDPE) 16. Low-Grade Paper
14. Magazines 17. Food Waste
15. Other Plastics 18. Wood Waste
In addition to the above State-required items, more materials are
being collected by local haulers. The City of Portland will add
milk jugs (HDPE) and magazines to their required materials. The
City of Seattle has required the collection of low-grade paper for
the past three years. Other container plastics have been tried by
some local haulers (PETE, PS, PP, LDPE) as well as separate
collection of food and wood wastes.
Attempting to educate the public on the mechanics of separating
eighteen materials at the curb and providing the space to collect
all these materials separately by haulers could severely hinder
public acceptance of future recycling programs. Alternatives should
be researched to provide possible solutions to the public's ability
to comprehend the recycling standards, the haulers ability to
handle all the material that is being placed at the curb, and to
meet market demands for clean, separated material for processing.
The procurement of a high-grade facility in Washington County
offers a possible solution by providing mechanical sorting capacity
to separate out, after collection, compatible materials that have
been grouped together for ease of collection.
The second concern to be reviewed is the problem of contamination
of source separated recyclables at mini-depots at multi-family (MF)
complexes. Existing MF recycling programs have experienced
consistent problems of improperly prepared materials, the wrong
material or garbage in with source-separated items. All three of
these problems risk rejection by the local hauler because of the
38
inability to market contaminated recyclables.
The current Washington County MF recycling plan calls for the
establishment of mini-depots at most MF complexes. Even with an
aggressive eduction program for tenants and mangers, a single
uneducated user can contaminate the entire depot. If MF recycling
is to be accepted by complex managers and owners, a method should
be developed to accept marginally contaminated source-separated
recyclables for additional processing to properly prepare the items
for the markets. A properly configured high-grade facility could
offer such mechanical sorting capacity.
The third concern the Technical Committee wants to research in the
procurement of a high-grade facility is the implementation of
"wet/dry" collection of commercial garbage. A system used in
European communities, this type of collection has seen limited
application in the United States. Similar to high-grade collection,
wet/dry establishes dual collection of all commercial accounts into
a dry segment generally made up of paper, metal, plastic and wood
and a wet collection of putrescible (food) wastes, glass and other
materials not compatible with the recyclable dry materials.
The dry loads are then taken to a material recovery facility for
separation and further processing for the markets. Again, a high-
grade facility has the mechanical capacity to perform such material
separation if configured properly. Additionally, the wet portion
of the commercial collection is very suitable to be disposed at the
Riedel Composter in Portland with the high food contents of these
loads.
Presently, a Washington County franchise hauler performs wet/dry
collection for commercial customers. Over the past two years,
experience has shown that a 50/50 split exists between wet and dry.
If similar assumptions used to determine high-grade numbers are
applied to dry commercial waste, then potential recovery can be
projected. Commercial waste accounts for half the general purpose
waste (GPW) , that fifty percent of commercial waste could be
diverted for dry processing and that fifty percent of material
processed could be recycled. The formula is:
. 5 GPW X 50% Diversion X 50% Recovery = Total HG Recycled
Comparing the amounts recycled between the two types of collection,
a high-grade process would yield 22, 352 tons of recyclable
material. A dry collection system would yield 39,915 tons of
recyclable material, or an increase of 79% more material for a
similar collection system.
Taken together, these three potential programs would significantly
upgrade the collection and marketing of the County's recycling
39
program. Although further review is necessary, such a facility
could be expected to handle:
Upgraded curbside recycling program - 52, 038 tons
Multi-Family recycling program - 7,214
"Dry" Commercial recycling program - 79,830
Total 139, 082 tons
Figure 13 shows the total potential waste reduction program
capacity based upon accommodating these three problem areas at a
modified high-grade facility. Compared to Figure 12, the total is
224, 561 tons or 64,900 additional tons. Future expansion is omitted
because of these additional tons.
Figure 13 POTENTIAL WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM
Residential
Other Recycling Curbside
Multi-Family
Special Waste Curbside
Recycling
Yard Debris
Recycling
NOT SHOWN:
High-Grade Recycling Commercial Dry
Recycling Total: 224,561 tons
Future Expansion
Solid waste, waste reduction and recycling are presently dynamic
management fields that require constant program review to ensure
the public is receiving the most cost-effective and efficient
system possible. All three of these concepts have been successfully
accomplished in other jurisdictions.
Metro's requirement that a high-grade facility be procured for
Washington County necessitates an analysis of other aspects of the
total recycling program. The Technical Committee is charged with
ensuring that the waste reduction system within the County is
effective and efficient.
40
The Committee will oversee the performance of a feasibility study
on an intermediate processing and marketing program for Washington
County jurisdictions and has budgeted $20, 000 for the completion
of that study. Completion of the study is scheduled for February
15, 1992 and will be timed to parallel Metro's procurement schedule
for the high-grade facility. This will assure local governmentA
have the necessary time to adequately review the study and request
from Metro that appropriate technology be required in any proposal
for siting and construction of the facility.
Task 13 - Perform an analysis of recycling incentives with
the development of model language for establishment
of local governmental service standards for
franchised haulers.
Although rate regulation through franchise agreements is fully
implemented within all the participating jurisdictions, there are
additional items that could be added to refine this system.
Additionally, analysis needs to be done to better define service
cost centers for select recycling activities of the franchised
haulers to ensure recycling incentives and other State-mandated
economic tests are fully developed in the waste reduction program.
Washington County and the participating cities recently adopted a
new annual report form that will allow County staff to determine
the true cost of required programs. This form, modeled after the
City of Tigard's form, differentiates costs and revenues between
each program, thereby allowing staff and decision makers a better
understanding of program impacts on business operations.
Maintaining a common report form among jurisdictions is a priority
of the Technical Committee. Standardization allows franchised
haulers that operate in multiple jurisdictions savings in
simplification of their accounting procedures which realizes a cost
savings.
Refinements to the standardized report form are necessary to
address hauler problem areas that arose in the last annual report.
Additional changes are necessary to accommodate the waste reduction
program changes that have taken place in the Year 1 plan and are
proposed in the Year 2 plan.
Specific areas to be reviewed include multi-family recycling, yard
debris recycling, and commercial recycling costs. Specific changes
that the Committee feels need to be made to the Annual Report Form
are the accommodation of a multi-family recycling cost center and
the preparation of the report for an anticipated commercial
recycling cost center. In addition, because the multi-family
recycling plan recommends the review of the establishment of a
multi-family commercial garbage rate, these revenues and costs
41
r
would need to be fully accounted.
Drop box recycling could be added to accommodate yard debris and
other commercial recycling activities. Yard debris as a separate
section should be deleted with costs and revenues to be accounted
in the residential or drop box recycling section. Problems in the
instructions and on the report form and other minor changes will
be addressed by the Committee prior to the end of 1991.
The Technical Committee recommends the initiation of a rate
incentive study with the allocation of $5, 000. To be administered
by the County, the rate study has the goal of providing to all the
participating jurisdictions the information necessary to ensure to
policy makers and to the public that adequate recycling incentives
are included in the overall garbage collection rate. Local
jurisdictions would then have an accurate and uniform method of
determining rates based on costs of various programs.
The study will be completed for review by local jurisdictions by
September 30, 1991.
Task 14 - Third year work plan is written and submitted on
time.
Participating jurisdictions have made a commitment to develop and
recommend revenue requirements for the 1992-93 budget process. This
activity will entail determining planned programs to be included
in Year 3 of the Washington County Wasteshed Five-Year Waste
Reduction Plan with cost estimates by November 1991.
The draft plan developed may have program alternatives dependent
upon the level of revenue that Metro contributes to Year 3 . The
finalized plan will be presented for approval once revenue sources
are determined. This time frame would require that a final plan be
ready by March 1992 to accommodate the time necessary for Council
and Board review.
SEVERABILITY
Funding and implementing this plan is based on cooperation of
eleven separate local governments. It is the intent of this plan
to address the specific concerns of each of those jurisdictions in
reaching a consensus in providing waste reduction and recycling
programs to citizens.
The Washington County Wasteshed Technical Committee produced an
effective and efficient plan for all participating jurisdictions
to adopt that would provide a consistent program for the franchise
haulers to implement and for the public to use.
42
• •
The individual local governments have the discretion to adopt or
not adopt this plan. The plan will be fully implemented by the
local governments that do adopt it, as indicated on the attached
signature page. Adoption of this plan requires participation in
the separate enabling intergovernmental agreement. If a local
government does not adopt this plan, it will be responsible for
developing and implementing their own waste reduction work plan.
(end)
43
TIMELINE
Years 1 and 2 Waste Reduction Activities
July 1, 1991 Addendum finished to Washington County Yard
Debris Recycling Plan for City of Wilsonville.
July 15, 1991 Multi-family recycling program is initiated.
Haulers report on type of complexes
participating.
August 15, 1991 Begin waste audit program.
September 15, 1991 Haulers report on implementation of Year 1
multi-family program and haulers report on
commercial account numbers.
September 30, 1991 Annual Report to Metro for Year 1 activities
completed. Recycling incentives analysis
completed.
October 15, 1991 Distribution of single family containers
begins.
November 1, 1991 Adjusted budget for multi-family recycling
implemented.
November 15, 1991 Jenkins Recycling Depot begins operation.
January 15, 1992 Special waste collection draft plan completed.
January 15, 1992 Commercial recycling guidelines are
established.
February 1, 1992 Building design model language completed.
February 15, 1992 Intermediate processing center study completed.
DEQ wasteshed report submitted.
March 15, 1992 Complete Year 2 waste audit program.
March 22, 1992 Third Year draft plan completed.
April 2 , 1992 Haulers report on completion of multi-family
activities for Year 1 and 2.
June 30, 1991 Submit Year 3 Waste Reduction Plan. Annual
Report to Metro for Year 2 activities
completed.
44
Appendix A A FIVE YEAR WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM
for Washington County Local Governments
Year 2
Programs for Fiscal Year 1991-92
:;.::.::.,:.t;•:<;;::;::::•;:;rj>:::::::'c2::::i:::::s't?;:;:;:::::5..::<.::�<.:i'::.:::y:;:::;:>::::::>;::::::i`::::: ::: ::2:%::::;::$^":: :i:: :::::i:::'<::::
:<:
� .......... > ..
i3
£isiN..EACF#.'tEAit.................................: tU#f M ( ::::::::: ......:....:....---
...t�►SAI..�V:4..�.�'#.ASI......................................................... ..................,.........,...::...:...........,..,
1 Regulate residential garbage no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate,but
collection through franchise to $12,500 per year revenue will require coordination with Metro
implement a uniform and required for promotion. and franchised haulers.Staff to
comprehensive weekly curbside Hauler costs to be coordinate container program.
recycling program with containers. $1 million per year long
term.
2 Regulate commercial garbage no additional FTE Washington County has substantially
collection through franchise to $7,500 per year revenue complied in Year 1.All jurisdictions
implement a uniform commercial required for promotion. have franchised commercial
waste reduction and recycling collection and will set recycling rates.
program that includes waste audits,
economic incentives and
collection standards.
3 Regulate multi-family garbage no additional FTE Washington County has substantially
collection through franchise to $6,500 per year revenue complied in Year 1.All jurisdictions
implement a multi-family recycling required for promotion. franchise multi-family collection and
program that gives apartment will set recycling rates.
owners/managers incentives to
promote recycling whle allowing
haulers to recover costs of
recycling services.
4 Implement in-house recycling no additional FTE Washington County has substantially
programs for all practical materials complied in Year 1.Materials other
at city and county facilites. than paper will be added.
5 Expand expertise to perform no additional FTE Washington County will perform
commercial waste audits for $4,500 per year revenue waste audits in all partnership cities
variety of businesses. Document required for promotion. to meet Metro standard for Year 2.
completion of at least 10 audits or
one percent of commercial sector.
Develop waste audit plan to be
implemented in Year 3.
6 Provide schools the opportunity no additional FTE Washington County has substantially
to participate in waste audits and complied in Year 1 and will continue
encourage them to implement support for this program.
waste reduction and recycling
programs.
7 Develop design review language no additional FTE Current staff level is adequate, but
to facilitate the incorporation of $5,000 per year revenue will require coordination with city and
recycling at commercial and required for promortion. County planning/building officials.
multi-family facilities.
8 Develop multi-family recycling no additional FTE Washington County to oversee
container plan. program to be performed by
franchised haulers.
r
:i�C1� ;�'i�':[> :'�!i�13fU� `:>>� �> ..........1�f�p1L"a'3�!!N.�C�i..:...........................:.:.:::..:::.::..�:.::::#.'.A�•3.................:................................... ,
fE 1 !.. NEW''
a`.
i M
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue to be shared by accomplish task with cooperation revenue to be shared by
jurisdictions. of local government coordinator. jurisdictions.
Staff to assist in coordination of
container program.•
no additional FTE Cities have substantially complied no additional FTE
revenue required would in Year 1.All jurisdictions have revenue required would
be cost shared. franchised commercial collection be cost shared.
and will set recycling rates.
no additional FTE Cities have substantially complied no additional FTE
revenue required would in Year 1. All jurisdictions franchise revenue required would
be cost shared. multi-family collection and will set be cost shared.
recycling rates.
no additional FTE Cities have substantially complied no additional FTE
in Year 1. Materials other than paper
will be added.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue required would accomplish task with cooperation revenue required would
be cost shared. of local government coordinator. ' be cost shared.
no additional FTE Cities have substantially complied no additional FTE
in Year 1 through County provided
school eduction program.
no additional FTE County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue to be shared by accomplish task with cooperation revenue to be shared by
jurisdictions. of local government coordinator. - jurisdictions.
no additional FTE County staff level adequate to no additional FTE
accomplish task with cooperation
of local government coordinator. •
Page 2
IA31J 1AS7£�Alit�C' tt�
AGG IPL SHiui�fil lS A ..:.;:.;::...... :..#�>at m X 23 :'.>::'.»..Y AS 1itdG1 t3N CCt�N>Y As :.: ......:: ::.
>:: :<;:iCt1# Is .hf ��:.:. ;;;:::;.;,;;;:: >:;;....ASI5.... b.::: ..:....................................................
flF;: 1
:::.:..::: .:.:::.:.::::.:...::.:.:.................. :::::.......A G Ik!# S ....... ...:::::::::::::
..:.......:.,...:,:,.::::::.::::.:::::::.::::.:,:,.:::.::.:::,.::.:::::.:.:::.::::........:::..::::.:.::.:..:..........................,:...::,::,:.
9 Plan and implement a yard debris no additional FTE Washington County has substantially ,
recycling program that conforms $7,000 per year revenue complied with DEQ approved plan.
with regional plan requirements. required for promortion.
10 Complete Annual Report no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
Worksheet for Year 1. $0 revenue required
11 Develop plan for special waste additional FTE likely, Current staff level is adequate.
collection. $0 revenue required
12 Perform a feasibilty study on an no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
intermediate processing and $20,000 for contract
marketing program of
residential,multi-family and
commercial recycled material.
13 Perform an analysis of recycling no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
incentives with the development $5,000 for contract
of model language for
establishment of local governmental
service standards for franchised
haulers.
14 Third year Work Plan is written and no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
submitted on time. $0 revenue required
• Cooperation of local government coordinator will consist of attending Technical Committee meetings to assist in plan develo
Administrative Costs
' ;'`2
'?iRG1�8[1UHiIICiIitMi�8di????E i`?z>`:23`i"?'i?ip?'3?.�9 CQtLHSf
i::i:'i:'`:5:
(CH3:.SIS'::`:5 <':':":'.'i°:"i'i:i:it'C i°.::;'<'':'?.... :.�iQ13n'.ra13K1�if•13'::':i:':'ti?:.:':.Y:i:i .:':::'ii: ::�i
5 .. ::thtElLi
.............. .:.................::........;::..........:1............. ........... .....................:::........... ....9...... .......:::::9............:::.:::;:.::::::.::::.::.:::::::::::::::.
r..
....: ................ nahrs: fees: ;::::>:<:> . M
etra<:Chall G
.......:.........:.::::::.:::::.::: .:..:.::.::::::::::::::.::.::.,:::::::::.:.:::.:::::::::::::::::::.::::::..::::::::::::::::::..:::::::::::.::::::.::::.:::.::.:.:..::::::::........:.:...:..........:........................
>::>:::<:::;... : t.......... ... ....:::. .a :. ::<:<:::::><::>:<::>::::>:::::<:>:<::::><:te......ai#fis::Yef:: >:>:<::::<:::>::::>::>::»>::>:«::::<:::>:ra........i€:iii:kear:ti'z:::>:»:«:::::>z::>:>::>ss>:>::: : ;:::>::>::»::::::<'>;:>#:
................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................
.25 FTE-Solid Waste Management
Coordinator $11,795 $0
1 FTE-Recycling Coordinator $43,016 $0
.75 FTE- Recycling Specialist $0 $26,966
.1 FTE-Infectious, Toxic and
Hazardous Waste Specialist $0 $4,301
$0 $0
Sub-Total $54,811 $31,267
Materials and Supplies $8,221 $4,690
Administrative Costs $16,114 $9,192
Promotion and Advertising $10,791 $19,383
Report Development Contracts $25,000 $0
Sub-Total $60,127 $33,266
Total $114,938 $64,533
>: ...# >wq.G''1 €.)'t�R:.............................................. ..:....:.................................
T MH
no additional FTE. County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$5,395 per year revenue accomplish task with cooperation $5,395 per year revenue
required would be cost of local government coordinator. •• required would be cost
shared. shared.
no additional FTE, More information on extent of no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required agreements is needed but current $0 revenue required
county staffing should be adequate
with cooperation of local
government coordinator.
no additional FTE Continuation of Year 2 program. no additional FTE
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue requirements accomplish task with cooperation revenue requirements
will need to be determined of local government coordinator. •• will need to be determined
by Metro, County&cities. by Metro.County&cities.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue requirements accomplish task with cooperation revenue requirements
will need to be determined of local government coordinator. •• will need to be determined
by Metro, County&cities. by Metro, County&cities.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
see above, yard accomplish task with cooperation see above,yard
debris revenue of local government coordinator. •• debris revenue
requirements. requirements.
no additional FTE, Each individual jurisdiction will no additional FTE,
$0 revenue provide individual coordinator. $0 revenue
required if internal If extensive program developed, required if internal
waste reduction it would require additional revenue. waste reduction
program coordinated. • program coordinated. •
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. •
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$2,000 per year accomplish task with cooperation $2,000 per year
revenue required would of local government coordinator. •• revenue required would
be cost shared. be cost shared.
Page 2 ._ __. ....
Y.A#i.`......... IdfA JOR WA5'I Fi1:CIJr: iCa�t' #'kiO3E Ti~A; t�1 Ai. pRl~1J1C kC�N tl t
::._.
CgMPf NM ITS A fi�tiE#Vtlf Off .T }+UA..Skt1NOT.....GQt#[..........
...:.......................................................................................
24 Toxic source reduction becomes Needs to be Depending on extent of reduction
a part of the waste audit system. determined. program, may need increase in time
for toxic and hazardous waste
coordinator.
25 Next phase of the yard debris no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
regional plan is adopted. if curbside collection
is adopted, revenue
requirements may
be substantial.
26 Fifth year Work Plan is written no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
and submitted on time. $0 revenue required
5 27 A five year report is written and no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
distributed. $0 revenue required
FY
94-95
28 Next five year forecast is no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
completed. $0 revenue required
29 Intra-regional agreements are no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate unless
renewed following an $0 revenue required major programs are developed
intergovernmental strategy with cities, other counties or Metro.
session.
• Revenue requirements may be met by using budgeted funds that will not be used due to decreased waste collection
•• Cooperation of local government coordinator will consist of attending Technical Committee meetings to assit in plan
P �R
�R. .i��Ql11;a;�M�t�'t'S pRR7N>~RSi3il�trl'f'I�S;.;>:::: »:><;�::�.::.:;';<::::>:>:: ...;.R�V�NI,fEr �'f"�::::.:>: :;::::>::>:'•�::::;:>:;<
1�## #stirs:>: :::`«:::<:>::>:»::>:;:>:>::>::>::>:<::
no additional FTE Cities have substantially complied no additional FTE
revenue to be shared by with DEQ approved plan. revenue to be shared by
jurisdictions. jurisdictions.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. •
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue required would accomplish task with cooperation revenue required would
be cost shared. of local government coordinator. • be cost shared.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
revenue required would accomplish task with cooperation revenue required would
be cost shared. of local government coordinator. • be cost shared.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. '
pment and implementation.
4:411:?•i:Sn;^}iii}ii:-i:•?i:4i:4:•iiii:4:•ii:4•:
:.x.;.;.:.;•1:.1:...1:.1:.::.:<.1:.,1>1i;.:?.1:.1:.»:.:?.::.:.:1::.;r:.::..:.r:.;>:S.s;:
::::. i'•i}i::ii:::::::::jii?iii};:ii:;:
::::::::::... :........:::.::.::::::::::::::::::.
::.;::•:...:a1:.:?•`;:::i•;:;:i;:i;:iii: iii:;:;:i:
...........:: .... h:t let ;:Rhella... a»:<:: ::
:>:::?: 1........................... : .. :::.:.::::::::::::..:::.:.
s<: ra
.75 FTE- Recycling Special. $26,966
.7 FTE-Secretary III $22,047
Sub-total $49,013
$7,352
$14,409
$14,129
$0
Sub-Total $35,890
Total $84,903
Appendix B A FIVE YEAR WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM
for Washington County Local Governments
Year 3, 4&5 Predictions
i3 l i3i3R tryf #� l tJ �?#E #G tfi............A4L::::>::>:>::>:>:r<:>:>::;:#'IR t . 4 t?
N... AS.;;:.: .>: ;:;.;:: E # C . .::. :.< W� N .4Kc.": TY A
:..................::................................................................:.........................................:............:.....:......................:.....:......................3.......
:Rh C'#'> C<.#1st. 4tC#.. EAl$:::::::...................... #EL1L1#i EMI;NTS';::..::::>:......::.;..::...iitt S'E5#iEiy... I!1"o.ur4TtV
A :fl. <:.`' i:::':> >:::;':? r»'>:€:>'?E'rE€::::>s>::>r;>:>:»::>::>€:'::::::>E:>':::>:`:<:::::::>: :>:€: ..�k. Ltl ..flf"::
::::s>:.»:>:::::::::>> ...4..S�v.. K.t'.f�1 ......................................................................................................G....1*JEM .......4F.......'C#Yf .......................:
3 15 Regional yard debris plans are no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate, but
incorporated into the local $5,395 per year will require coordination with Metro
FY operating system. revenue required for and franchised haulers.
92-93 promotion.
16 Intra-regional agreements are no additional FTE, More information on extent of
authorized to share program $0 revenue required agreements is needed but current
administration and facilities, county staffing should be adequate.
17 Waste audit program becomes a no additional FTE Continuation of Year 2 program.
regular service provided by the
local government in a
public-private partnership
agreement.
18 All generators are source no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.This
separating clean loads for revenue requirements will require coordination with
commercial collection. will need to be determined franchised haulers and transfer
by Metro,County&cities. station operators.
19 Plastic collection at curbside is no additional FTE, - Current staff level is adequate.This
started. revenue requirements will require coordination with
will need to be determined franchised haulers.
by Metro, County&cities.
20 Greater source reduction of no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate, but
yard debris is achieved through see above,yard will require coordination with Metro
an individual compost bin debris revenue &franchised haulers.
program assisted by Metro requirements. -
and local government.
21 Public works department completes no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.This
phased-in purchasing, reclamation, $0 revenue will require coordination with public
and recycling program for all city required if internal works. If extensive program developed,
properties, the fleet, and streets waste reduction it would require additional revenue.
applications. program coordinated. ••
22 Fourth year Work Plan is written no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
and submitted on time. $0 revenue required
4 23 All building/construction no additional FTE, Current staff level is adequate.
material for disposal in the local $2,000 per year
FY area is directed to recycling revenue required
93-94 facilities for reuse of recycling. for promotion.
,. ... ,.
PRQJ
SIC: Q t tf J G l p
:...::.. .......:...::::..:.
............:...
...............
���l1�4'k'Y RS:.;<::>::;:::>:>; AI�FkJ�V��tk'3�#'t',fl�::>::>:>:::>:. .::.::::>:: R�4U11� ���'s :.;:.;..;.;:.:;• ;;•:
Revenue requirements County staff level adequate to finish revenue requirements
will need to be determined current task requirements with will need to be determined
by Metro, County&cities. cooperation of local government by Metro,County&cities.
coordinator. ••
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
if curbside collection accomplish task with cooperation if curbside collection
is adopted, revenue of local government coordinator. •• is adopted, revenue
requirements may requirements may
be substantial. be substantial.
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. ••
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. ••
no additional FTE, County staff level adequate to no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required accomplish task with cooperation $0 revenue required
of local government coordinator. ••
no additional FTE, County staff level is adequate unless no additional FTE,
$0 revenue required major programs are developed $0 revenue required
with county,other cities or Metro.
ervice.
evelopment and implementation.
Appendix C WASHINGTON COUNTY WASTESHED
Waste Reduction Program
Year 2 of the Five Year Waste Reduction Plan
Container Program
Project Budget Distribution of Cost Sharing
Average Seven Year Average
First Year Seven Year One Year Total Cost One Year
Cost of Total Cost Costs Over First Year Share from Costs Share One Year •
1. Containers Bins of Program First 7 Yrs. 1.Metro Cost Share Each Source First 7 Yrs. Percent
Initial purchase&delivery $240,000 $240,000 $34,286 flyers $20,426 $20,426 $2,918
80,000 units decals @.15/ea. $12,000 $12,000 $1,714
10%replacement cost $24,000 $168,000 $24,000 decal placement $5,800 $5,800 $829
distribution of containers $71,823 $71,823 $10,260
2. Labor Costs distribution office support $39,952 $39,952 $5,707
37.5%of container cost $90,000 $90,000 $12,857
Decal placement $5,800 $9,860 $1,409
1 minute each @ 4.35/hr. Metro Total $240,000 $240,000 $34,286 11%
Distribution of containers $71,823 $71,823 $10,260 3%
Distribution office support $39,952 $39,952 $5,707 2.County
Additional overhead $133,174 $932,221 $133,174
(office support staff @12.50/hr.) program coordination $24,511 $24,511 $3,502
Additional materials handling $730,213 $5,111,489 $730,213
(increased labor and overhead) County Total $24,511 $24,511 $3,502 1%
0%
3. Additional New Equipment $851,064 $851,064 $121,581 3.Solid Waste Collectors
10%replacement cost $24,000 $168,000 $24,000 !
4. Printing other replacement cost $0 $26,757 $3,822
62.5%of container costs $150,000 $150,000 $21,429
Flyers $20,426 $34,723 $4,960 additional overhead $133,174 $932,221 $133,174
Decals @ .15/ea. $12,000 $20,400 $2,914 additional materials handling $730,213 $5,111,489 $730,213
additional or new equipment $851,064 $851,064 $121,581
5..Program Coordination $24,511 $24,511 $3,502
(Washington Co.for 1 year) Solid Waste Collectors Total $1,888,451 $7,239,531 $1,034,219 88%
96%
Total Program Costs $2,152,962 $7,504,043 $1,072,006 Total Estimated Project Cost $2,152,962 $7,504,043 $1,072,006
MEMORANDUM •
S
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Solid Waste Advisory Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin
9--a-
DATE: July 9, 1991
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #5 - Solid Waste Ordinance Discussion
On Tuesday, July 8th, Gerry McReynolds, Lee Kell, Jim Coleman, and
myself met to review the policy issues and staff's process
recommendations (highlighted in my 6/7/91 memo) in an effort to
def ine more closely the issues for the Committee's meeting on 7/15.
Following are the results of our discussions listed in order as
they appear in the proposed ordinance and outlined in the 6/7 memo.
GENERATOR HAULING OWN WASTE
The question is two-fold in this issue:
1. Who can haul their own waste and how do we def ine the
classification? Currently all generators (residential,
commercial, & contractors) are allowed to haul their own
waste. In the proposed language, commercial generators
are excluded from the list.
Discussion centered around whether reference to land use
type (single family, multi-family, commercial) would help
clarify who hauls or whether the method of classification
should focus on type of container (can vs. dumpsters) .
2. Do we need to broaden the classification? Current
ordinance language interpretation allows some question as
to whether landlords can collect within their complex.
Proposed language excludes collection by landlords or
property owners of tenant occupied areas.
CONSTRUCTION SITE HAULING
The Committee, haulers, and staff agree that the proposed
language makes it clear that mixed waste hauling from
construction sites is allowed only by the franchisees. Source
separated materials for recycling can be hauled by a third
party hauler if the generator was compensated at "fair market
value" .
FRANCHISE TERM
Current ordinance language does not define a process for
ordinance amendments. Lee Kell will be drafting the haulers
proposal for amendment language for review. Due to tight time
schedules, the proposals will be submitted for Committee
discussion at the August 19th meeting.
PAGE 2 OF 3 • •
SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
JULY 9, 1991
RATE SETTING PROCESS
Current ordinance language allows for auditing records for
franchise fee computations only. After discussing some
concerns about use of audit information, Jim Coleman drafted
the following modification to staff's recommended language.
11.04.065 Franchisee Records
A. Franchisee shall keep accurate books and records
related to all solid waste activities earried
within the franehise area within the ei-ty. Such
books and records shall be open to inspection by
the City, its attorney, or other authorized agent
at any time during the franchisee's business hours.
B. The City may audit or review said books and records
as it deems necessary. Information obtained from
such audits or reviews may be used to determine the
amounts due to the City under the provisions of
this franchise agreement. Such information may
also be used by the City to determine costs of
particular services, to determine changes to the
schedule of solid waste rates, or for any other
regulatorypurpose.:...::::::::::::
wh
. . .: :::.::::: :::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::.:: ::.;:..........:.:;:
X.
:::. .:::::::::::::::::::.::::::::
: :»: . ;.. .::: t Vie.:: # »:< ............................::.::..::. ..
Id.
t b
thiN. hi
10 s > x. ;: ....:>. : . .. d.
.x :.:..:.::
........ . .................
: i
FIR` 4
.......................................................................................................................................
HAULERS ABILITY TO BILL OWNER
After discussing this issue, Jim Coleman was asked to give a
detailed explanation of the Measure 5 concerns to the
Committee. It was noted that should the ordinance no longer
speak to whether an owner should be billed, the haulers would
not be precluded from setting this as their business practise.
COMPACTOR ANNUAL INSPECTION
The group agreed to disagree on this issue. Gerry McReynolds
feels strongly that the City should provide ongoing compliance
inspections and I continue to be concerned that the City
should not assume the liability of conducting annual
inspections.
PAGE 3 OF 3 0 •
SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
JULY 9, 1991
PENALTIES
The Committee, haulers, and staff agree that the best process
would be civil infraction penalties.
NON-PROFIT COLLECTION PERMIT PROCESS
The group tentatively agreed that deleting the permit process
for non-profit collections would be acceptable.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULE APPROVAL
It was suggested that language might be changed to allow all
rules and amendments to be approved by the City Administrator
if the haulers agreed with the rules during their 30-day
review period. If the haulers disagreed with a proposed rule,
it would automatically go to the Council for consideration.
ANNUAL REPORT ADOPTION
The group tentatively agreed that the annual report form being
adopted by administrative rule would create less need for
ordinance amendments.
le/ms
• � l
MEMORANDUM MOL;
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Solid Waste Ad
visory Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin July 2, 1991
SUBJECT: New Recycling Legislation
Senate Bill 66 is going to effect the solid waste industry for
years to come. I thought each of you would like a copy of the bill
to review.
Since the bill is lengthy, I've also enclosed a synopsis from OSSI
and one from METRO to assist you in understanding the key elements
of this legislation.
VOL.6 NO. 6 A PUBLICATION OF OREGON SANITARY SERVICE INSTITUTE JUNF, 1991
INSERT RECEIVED
THE NEW RECYCLING BILL (SB 66) v
Here are Its Key Provisions ICEu+ALyERM&RUNSMN
Performance goals collection of source-separated mate- Cities over 4,000 must either:
rials on same day as garbage service,
Statewide, by the year 2000 at and an expanded education and (1) provide recycling containers. to
least 50% recovery from the general promotion program; and implement residential service customers by
solid waste stream. one of items (a) through (h) below January 1, 1993; weekly curbside
or collection of source-separated mate-
Wasteshed recovery rates, by (2) provide five of the following eight rials on same day as garbage service;
1995: items: and an expanded education and
(a)recycling containers promotion program;
45%: Clackamas, Multnomah and (b)weekly same-day curbside or
Washington counties (with no more coliecGon (2) provide three of items (a) through
than 5% from mixed solid waste (c)expanded education and (h) above
composting), promotion or
(d)collection of at least four (3) implement an alternative method
30%: Benton, (Jane, Tann, Marion*, principal recyclable materials (or a that complies with EQC rules.
Polk, Yamhill lesser number of materials required
under the residential program) from Recovery Fates are determined by
25%: Clatsop, Columbia, De- each multifamily housing complex dividing the total weight of material
schutes, Douglas, Hood River, Jack- having five or more units recovered, by the sum of the total
son,Josephine, Wasco (e)an effective residential yard weight of the material recovered plus
debris collection and composting the total weight of solid waste gener-
15%; Baker, Coos, Crook, Curry, program ated wiMin each wasteshed and
Klamath, Lincoln, Malheur, Tillamook, (f) commercial and institutional disposed of at municipal solid waste
Umatilla, Union, Milton-Freewater recycling of source-separated materi-- disposal sites.
als from firms employing 10 or more
7%: Gilliam, Grant, Harney, Jefferson, individuals and occupying 1,000 The recovery rate includes all
Lake, Morrow, Sherman, Wallowa, square feet in a single location recyclable material and all yard de-
Wheeler (g)expanded recycling depots bris. Composting and energy recov-
(h)solid waste residential collet- ery are included (a) if there is not a
" In wastesheds using an energy tion rates that encourage waste reduc- viable market for the material if it
recovery facility, 25% for the first tion, reuse and recycling, specifically were source-separated and (b) in the
180,000 tons and 30% thereafter, through reduced rates for smaller case of mixed materials, unless more
containers and rates which do not than half of the materials (by weight)
Service standards decrease on a per pound basis for could have been recycled if properly
larger containers nor decrease per source-separated. The rate does not
Cities over 10,000 must by July container with additional containers. include: discarded vehicles; certain
1, 1992 either: or industrial and manufacturing wastes;
(3) implement an alternative method or mixed solid waste burned for
(1) provide recycling containers to that complies with rules of Environ-- energy recovery.
residential service customers by mental quality Commission (EQC).
January 1, 1993, weekly curbside
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tl Ik/-?7-Q+ TuII
"Viable w a lace collect or dispose of that material as Statewide Inte rated Solid Waste
market means p p g
within a wasteshed that will pay for solid waste. Management Plan: DEC must
the material or accept the material develop a plan, in conjunction with the
free of charge or a place outside a If a wasteshed fails to achieve Economic Development Department,
wasteshed that will pay a price for the Its recovery rate, any city of more regional agencies and local govern-
material that, at minimum, covers the than 4,000 or a county responsible for ments, to address solid waste man-
cost of transportation of the material, the area between the city limits and agement at least 10 years into the
the urban growth boundary of such future.
The now law provides that each city shall institute, not later than July
local government that franchises or 1, 1996, two additional Items of the Technical assistance: DEC is to
licenses the collection of solid waste program elements. provide technical assistance to local
and establishes the rates to be governments on solid waste reduc-
charged for collection service shall The Legislature is required to tion, recycling and management
either: review the 1995 recovery rates programs.
achieved by each wasteshed and
(a)Include in those rates all net by the state as a whole and set new Household hazardous waste: DEC
costs incurred by the franchisee or recovery rates for the year 2000. may (and expects to) contract with a
licensee for providing the "opportunity hazardous waste collection service to
to recycle" and for implementing the provide collection of household
required service standards, or Solid waste hierarchy: Adds hazardous waste at various locations
composting to the hierarchy after in the State.
(b)Fund implementation of the recycling and before energy recovery.
"opportunity to recycle' or the re- Landfill restrictions: Prohibits
quirements through an alternative Annual rec clin report: Modifies persons from disposing of, and land-
source of funding including but not current recycling report requirement to fills from accepting for disposal, dis-
limited to disposal fees. require counties, on behalf of cities carded vehicles, large home or indus-
within wasteshed,to submit an annual trial appliances, used oil, waste tires,
"Net costs" includes but is not limited recycling report. or lead-acid batteries.
to the reasonable costs for collecting,
handling, processing, storing, trans- The report would detail participa- We will not try to provide a
porting and delivering recyclable tion rates, material collected, and summary of the law's provisions relat-
material to market and for providing recommendations for recycling im- ing to market development. Suffice
any required education and promotion provements. to say that it places great emphasis
or data collection services adjusted by on the need to strengthen markets for
a factor to account for proceeds from The DEC shall at least annually recycled materials, and includes
the sale of recyclable material. survey the extent of recycling at specific requirements for minimum
buy back centers and other such facili- content(in newsprint,telephone direc-
The new law also expressly ties, and shall report biennially to the tories, glass,plastics); for governmen-
provides that a collection service or Legislature on recycling in Oregon. tal procurement purchase preferences
disposal site may charge a person (with particular focus on paper
who does not have solid waste Solid Waste Composltlon Study: products, compost, sewage sludge,
collection service, but who source DEC must conduct a study once a used oil, possibly retreaded tires and
separates recyclable material and biennium (except to the extent there rubberized paving from waste tires);
makes the material available for reuse are already studies). and manufacturers' self-assessments
or recycling, for the cost of providing to fund a Recycling Markets Devel-
that service; in no case shall the opment Council (with divisions for
charge be greater than the charge to glass, paper, and plastics),
A
.rut
66th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY-4991 Regular Session
D-En s
gro sed
Senate Bill 66
Ordered by the House June 17
Including Senate Amendments dated March 4 and April 25 and House
Amendments dated June 7 and June 17
' Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conformance with pre-
session filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the President (at the request
of Joint Interim Committee on Environment, Energy and Hazardous Materials)
SUMMARY
The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject
to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's brief statement of the essential features of the
measure.
Establishes statewide integrated solid waste management program. Establishes solid waste re-
duction goals and rates. Specifies duties of local governments on solid waste reduction. Establishes
procurement requirements for state and public agencies for reused or recycled products. Modifies
waste disposal rates and schedules. Establishes education requirements. Creates Recycling Markets
Development Council and Oregon Newsprint Recycling Task Force. Establishes minimum content
requirements for newsprint and labeling requirements for plastic containers. Appropriates money.
Limits expenditures.
Declares emergency, effective July 1, 1991.
1 A BILL FOR AN ACT
2 Relating to solid waste; creating new provisions; amending ORS 182.375, 279.731, 279.733, 279.739,
C3 459.005, 459.015, 459.165, 459.175, 459.180, 459.185, 459.190, 459.235, 459.294 and 459.995; appro-
4 priating money; limiting expenditures; and declaring an emergency.
5 Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
6 SECTION 1. ORS 459.292, 459.293, 459.294 and 459.295 and sections 2, 4, 5 and 13a of this Act
7 are added to and made a part of ORS 459.165 to 459.200.
8 SECTION 2. (1) It is the goal of the State of Oregon that by January 1, 2000, the amount of
9 recovery from the general solid waste stream shall be at least 50 percent.
10 (2) In addition to the requirements of ORS 459.165, the "opportunity to recycle" shall include
11 the requirements of subsection (3) of this section, which shall be implemented on or before July 1,
12 1992, by using the following program elements:
13 (a) Provision of at least one durable recycling container to each residential service customer
r,
14 by not later than January 1, 1993.
15 (b) On-route collection at least once each week of source separated recyclable material to resi-
16 dential customers, provided on the same day that solid waste is collected from each customer.
17 (c) An expanded education and promotion program conducted to inform citizens of the manner
18 and benefits of reducing, reusing and recycling material. The program shall include:
19 (A) Provision of recycling notification and education packets to all new residential, commercial
20 and institutional collection service customers that includes at a minimum the materials collected,
21 the schedule for collection, the way to prepare materials for collection and reasons that persons
22 should separate their material for recycling;
23 (B) Provision of quarterly recycling information to residential, commercial and institutional
24 collection service customers that includes at a minimum the materials collected, the schedule for
NOTE: Matter in bold face in an amended section is new,matter[italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted
D-Eng. SB 66
1 collection and at least annually includes additional information including the procedure for prepar-
2 ing materials for collection; and
3 (C) Targeting of community and media events to promote recycling.
4 (d) Collection of at least four principal recyclable materials or the number of materials required
5 to be collected under the residential on-route collection program, whichever is less, from each
6 multifamily dwelling complex having five or more units. The multifamily collection program shall
7 include promotion and education directed to the residents of the multifamily dwelling units.
8 (e) An effective residential yard debris collection and composting program that includes the
9 promotion of home composting of yard debris, and that also includes either:
10 (A) Monthly or more frequent on-route collection of yard debris from residences for production
11 of compost or other marketable products; or
1 12 (B) A system of yard debris collection depots conveniently located and open to the public at
1 13 least once a week.
1 14 (f) Regular onsite collection of source separated principal recyclable materials from commercial
1 15 and institutional solid waste generators employing 10 or more persons and occupying 1,000 square
1 16 feet or more in a single location. As used in this paragraph, "commercial and institutional solid
L 17 waste generators" means stores, offices including manufacturing and industry offices, restaurants,
1: 18 warehouses, schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and other nonmanufacturing entities, but does
2( 19 not include other manufacturing activities or business, manufacturing or processing activities in
21 20 residential dwellings.
22 21 (g) Expanded depots for recycling of at least all principal recyclable materials and provisions
23 22 for promotion and education to maximize the use of the depots. The depots shall have regular and
24 23 convenient hours and shall be open on the weekend days and, when feasible, shall collect additional C
25 24 recyclable materials.
26 25 (h) Solid waste residential collection rates that encourage waste reduction, reuse and recycling
27 26 through reduced rates for smaller containers, including at least one rate for a container that is 21
28 27 gallons or less in size. Based on the average weight of solid waste disposed per container for con-
29 28 tainers of different sizes, the rate on a per pound disposed basis shall not decrease with increasing
30 29 size of containers, nor shall the rates per container service be less with additional containers ser-
31 30 viced.
32 31 (3)(a) Not later than July 1, 1992, each city with a population of at least 4,000 but not more than
33 32 10,000 that is not within a metropolitan service district and any county responsible for the area
34 33 between the city limits and the urban growth boundary of such city shall implement one of the fol-
35 34 lowing:
36 35 (A) The program elements set forth in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of subsection (2) of this section;
37 36
(B) A program that includes at least three elements set forth in subsection (2) of this section;
38 37 or
39 38 (C) An alternative method of achieving recycling rates that complies with rules of the Environ-
40 39 mental Quality Commission.
41 40
(b) Not later than July 1, 1992, each city that is within a metropolitan service district or that
42 41 has a population of more than 10,000 and any county responsible for the area within a metropolitan
43 42 service district or the area between the city limits and the urban growth boundary of such city shall
44 43 implement one of the following:
44 (A) Program elements set forth under paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of subsection (2) of this section
[2)
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 and one additional element set forth under subsection (2) of this section;
2 (B) A program that includes at least five elements set forth under subsection (2) of this section;
3 or
4 (C) An alternative method of achieving recycling rates that complies with rules of the Environ-
5 mental Quality Commission.
6 (4)(a) Recovery rates shall be determined by dividing the total weight of material recovered by
7 the sum of the total weight of the material recovered plus the total weight of solid waste disposed
8 that was generated in each wasteshed. It is the policy of the State of Oregon that recovery of ma-
9 terial shall be consistent with the priority of solid waste management in ORS 459.015 (2). Therefore,
10 except as provided in subsection (6) of this section, recovery rates shall include all material col-
11 lected for recycling, both source separated or sorted from solid waste, including yard debris.
12 (b) If there is not a viable market for recycling a material under paragraph (a) of this sub-
13 section, the composting or burning of the material for energy recovery may be included in the re-
14 covery rate for the wasteshed. Mixtures of materials that are composted or burned for energy
15 recovery shall not be included in the recovery rate if more than half of the materials by weight
16 could have been recycled if properly source separated. In its annual report to the department, the
17 county or metropolitan service district shall state how much composting or energy recovery under
18 this paragraph is included as recovery and state the basis for the determination that there was not
19 a viable market for recycling the material. As used in this paragraph, "viable market" means a place
20 within a wasteshed that will pay for the material or accept the material free of charge or a place
21 outside a wasteshed that will pay a price for the material that, at minimum, covers the cost of
22 transportation of the material.
23 (c) Recovery rates shall not include:
24 (A) Industrial and manufacturing wastes such as boxboard clippings and metal trim that are
25 recycled before becoming part of a product that has entered the wholesale or retail market.
26 (B) Metal demolition debris in which arrangements are made to sell or give the material to
27 processors before demolition such that it does not enter the solid waste stream.
28 (C) Discarded vehicles or parts of vehicles that do not routinely enter the solid waste stream.
29 (D) Material recovered for composting or energy recovery from mixed solid waste, except as
30 provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection and in paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of this section.
31 (E) Mixed solid waste burned for energy recovery.
32 (d) "Solid waste disposed" shall mean the total weight of solid waste disposed other than the
33 following:
34 (A) Sewage sludge or septic tank and cesspool pumpings;
35 (B) Waste disposed of at an industrial waste disposal site;
36 (C) Industrial waste, ash, inert rock, dirt, plaster, asphalt and similar material if delivered to a
37 municipal solid waste disposal site or demolition disposal site and if a record is kept of such deliv-
38 eries and submitted as part of the annual report submitted under ORS 459.180;
39 (D) Waste received at an ash monofill from a resource recovery facility; and
40 (E) Solid waste not generated within this state.
41 (5)(a) Each local government that franchises or licenses the collection of solid waste and es-
42 tablishes the rates to be charged for collection service shall either:
43 (A) Include in those rates all net costs incurred by the franchisee or licensee for providing the
44 "opportunity to recycle" under ORS 459.165 and for implementing the requirements of subsection (3)
[31
0 •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 of this section; or
2 (B) Fund implementation of the "opportunity to recycle" under ORS 459.165 or the requirements
3 of subsection (3) of this section through an alternative source of funding including but not limited
4 to disposal fees.
5 (b) As used in this subsection, "net costs" includes but is not limited to the reasonable costs for
6 collecting, handling, processing, storing, transporting and delivering recyclable material to market
7 and for providing any required education and promotion or data collection services adjusted by a
8 factor to account for proceeds from the sale of recyclable material.
9 (6)(a) Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties, in aggregate, shall achieve a recovery
10 rate of 45 percent for the calendar year 1995. No more than five percent of the recovery level may
11 be achieved by the processing of mixed solid waste compost. If the metropolitan service district does
12 not develop a mixed solid waste composting process, the recovery rate for Clackamas, Multnomah
13 and Washington counties, in aggregate, shall be 40 percent for the calendar year 1995.
14 (b) The following wastesheds shall achieve a recovery rate of 30 percent for the calendar year
15 1995:
16 (A) Benton County;
17 (B) Lane County;
18 (C) Linn County;
19 (D) Marion County;
20 (E) Polk County; and
21 (F) Yamhill County.
22 (c) The following wastesheds shall achieve a recovery rate of 25 percent for the calendar year
23 1995:
24 (A) Clatsop County;
25 (B) Columbia County;
26 (C) Deschutes County;
27 (D) Douglas County;
28 (E) Hood River County;
29 (F) Jackson County;
30 (G) Josephine County; and
31 (H) Wasco County.
32 (d) The following wastesheds shall achieve a recovery rate of 15 percent for the calendar year
33 1995:
34 (A) Baker County;
35 (B) Coos County;
36 (C) Crook County;
37 (D) Curry County;
38 (E) Klamath County;
39 (F) Lincoln County;
40 (G) Malheur County;
41 (H) Tillamook County;
42 (I) Umatilla County;
43 (J) Union County; and
44 (K) The City of Milton-Freewater.
[4]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (e) The following wastesheds shall achieve a recovery rate of seven percent for the calendar
C 2 year 1995:
3 (A) Gilliam County;
4 (B) Grant County;
5 (C) Harney County;
6 (D) Jefferson County;
7 (E) Lake County;
8 (F) Morrow County;
9 (G) Sherman County;
10 (H) Wallowa County; and
11 (I) Wheeler County.
12 (7) In any wasteshed set forth in paragraph (b) of subsection (6) of this section using, on or be-
13 fore the effective date of this 1991 Act, an energy recovery facility to dispose of its solid waste, the
14 recovery rate shall be 25 percent until the solid waste disposed of from within the wasteshed ex-
15 ceeds 180,000 tons. Any solid waste disposed of by the wasteshed in excess of 180,000 tons shall
16 achieve a recovery rate of 30 percent.
17 (8) If a wasteshed fails to achieve the recovery rate set forth in subsection (6) or (7) of this
18 section, any city with a population of more than 4,000 or a county responsible for the area between
19 the city limits and the urban growth boundary of such city shall institute, not later than July 1,
20 1996, two additional program elements as set forth in subsection (2) of this section.
21 (9) In calculating the rates set forth in subsection (6) of this section, commercial, industrial and
( 22 demolition scrap metal, vehicles, major equipment and home or industrial appliances that are han-
23 dled or processed for use in manufacturing new products and that do not routinely enter the solid
24 waste stream through land disposal facilities, transfer stations, recycling depots or on-route col-
25 lection programs shall not be counted as material recovery or recycling. The department shall an-
26 nually conduct an industry survey to determine the contribution of post-consumer residential scrap
27 metal, including home appliances, to recycling and recovery levels in a manner which prevents
28 double counting of material recovered. Information collected under the provisions of this section,
29 as it relates specifically rivate sector customer lists or specific amounts and
to p p types of materials
30 collected or marketed, shall be maintained as confidential by the department and exempt Trom dis-
31 closure under ORS 192.410 to 192.505. The department may use and disclose such information in
32 aggregated form.
33 SECTION 2a. The Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly shall review the 1995 recovery rates
34 achieved by each wasteshed and by the state as a whole, and shall set wasteshed recovery rates,
35 or other goals that allow measurement of each wasteshed's progress in achieving greater reduction,
36 reuse and recycling, for the calendar year 2000.
37 SECTION 3. ORS 459.190 is amended to read:
38 459.190. (1) A collection service or disposal site may charge a person who source separates
39 recyclable material and makes it available for reuse or recycling less, but not more, for collection
40 and disposal of solid waste and collection of recyclable material than'the collection service charges
41 a person who does not source separate recyclable material.
42 (2) A collection service or disposal site may charge a person who does not have solid
43 waste collection service but who source separates recyclable material and makes the mate-
44 rial available for reuse or recycling, for the cost of providing that service. In no case shall
[5)
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 the charge be greater than the charge to collect or dispose of that material as solid waste.
2 SECTION 4. After January 1, 1995, a city or county may request from the department a vari- (�
3 ante under ORS 459.185 from section 2 (8) of this 1991 Act if beginning in 1992, the measurement
4 of disposal rates shows that the per capita disposal rate is decreasing at a rate of five percent or
5 more per year.
6 SECTION 5. The department shall conduct a solid waste composition study at least once a
7 biennium for all areas of the state not covered by other composition studies. The study may include:
8 (1) A measurement of the per capita waste disposal rate; or
9 (2) A statewide survey of the amount of waste reduced through resource recovery.
10 SECTION 6. ORS 459.005 is amended to read:
11 459.005. As used in ORS 275.275, 459.005 to 459.426, unless the context requires otherwise:
12 (1) "Affected person" means a person or entity involved in the solid waste collection service
13 process including but not limited to a recycling collection service, disposal site permittee or owner,
14 city, county and metropolitan service district.
15 (2) "Area of the state" means any city or county or combination or portion thereof or other
16 geographical area of the state as may be designated by the commission.
17 (3) "Board of county commissioners" or "board" includes county court.
18 (4) "Collection franchise" means a franchise, certificate, contract or license issued by a city or
19 county authorizing a person to provide collection service.
20 (5) "Collection service" means a service that provides for collection of solid waste or recyclable
21 material or both.
22 (6) "Commercial" means stores, offices including manufacturing and industry offices,
23 restaurants, warehouses, schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and other nonmanufactur- (/\
24 ing entities, but does not include other manufacturing activities or business, manufacturing
25 or processing activities in residential dwellings.
26 [(6)] (7) "Commission" means the Environmental Quality Commission.
27 (8) "Compost" means the controlled biological decomposition of organic material or the
28 product resulting from such a process.
29 [(7)] (9) "Conditionally exempt small quantity generator" means a person that generates a haz-
30 ardous waste but is conditionally exempt from substantive regulation because the waste is generated
31 in quantities below the threshold for regulation adopted by the commission pursuant to ORS 466.020.
32 [(8)] (10) "Department" means the Department of Environmental Quality.
33 [(9)] (11) "Disposal site" means land and facilities used for the disposal, handling or transfer of
34 or resource recovery from solid wastes, including but not limited to dumps, landfills, sludge lagoons, '
35 sludge treatment facilities, disposal sites for septic tank pumping or cesspool cleaning service,
36 transfer stations, resource recovery facilities, incinerators for solid waste delivered by the public
37 or by a solid waste collection service, composting plants and land and facilities previously used for
38 solid waste disposal at a land disposal site; but the term does not include a facility subject to the
39 permit requirements of ORS 468.740; a landfill site which is used by the owner or person in control
40 of the premises to dispose of soil, rock, concrete or other similar nondecomposable material, unless
41 the site is used by the public either directly or through a solid waste collection service; or a site
42 operated by a wrecker issued a certificate under ORS 822.110.
43 [(10)] (12) "Hazardous waste" has the meaning given that term in ORS 466.005.
44 [(I1)] (13) "Hazardous waste collection service" means a service that collects hazardous waste
[s]
0 •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 from exempt small quantity generators and from households.
2 [(12)] (14) "Household hazardous waste" means any discarded, useless or unwanted chemical,
3 material, substance or product that is or may be hazardous or toxic to the public or the environment
4 and is commonly used in or around households which may include, but is not limited to, some
5 cleaners, solvents, pesticides, and automotive and paint products.
6 [(13)) (15) "Land disposal site" means a disposal site in which the method of disposing of solid
7 waste is by landfill, dump, pit, pond or lagoon.
8 [(14)] (16) "Land reclamation" means the restoration of land to a better or more useful state.
9 [(15)) (17) "Local government unit" means a city, county, metropolitan service district formed
10 under ORS chapter 268, sanitary district or sanitary authority formed under ORS chapter 450,
11 county service district formed under ORS chapter 451, regional air quality control authority formed
12 under ORS 468.500 to 468.530 and 468.540 to 468.575 or any other local government unit responsible
13 for solid waste management.
14 [(16)) (18) "Metropolitan service district" means a district organized under ORS chapter 268 and
15 exercising solid waste authority granted to such district under this chapter and ORS chapter 268.
16 [(17)] (19) "Periodic collection event" means the collection of household hazardous waste or
17 conditionally exempt small quantity generator hazardous waste at a temporary facility.
18 [(18)] (20) "Permit" includes, but is not limited to, a conditional permit.
19 [(19)] (21) "Person" means the state or a public or private corporation, local government unit,
20 public agency, individual, partnership, association, firm, trust, estate or any other legal entity.
21 [(20)] (22) "Recyclable material" means any material or group of materials that can be collected
C 22 and sold for recycling at a net cost equal to or less than the cost of collection and disposal of the
23 same material.
24 [(21)) (23) "Regional disposal site" means:
25 (a) A disposal site selected pursuant to chapter 679, Oregon Laws 1985; or
26 (b) A disposal site that receives, or a proposed disposal site that is designed to receive more
27 than 75,000 tons of solid waste a year from commercial haulers from outside.the immediate service
28 area in which the disposal site is located. As used in this paragraph, "immediate service area"
29 means the county boundary of all counties except a county that is within the boundary of the met-
30 ropolitan service district. For a county within the metropolitan service district, "immediate service
31 area" means the metropolitan service district boundary.
32 [(22)) (24) "Resource recovery" means the process of obtaining useful material or energy re-
33 sources from solid waste and includes:
34 (a) "Energy recovery," which means recovery in which all or a part of the solid waste materials
35 are processed to utilize the heat content, or other forms of energy, of or from the material.
36 (b) "Material recovery," which means any process of obtaining from solid waste, by presegre-
37 gation or otherwise, materials which still have useful physical or chemical properties [after serving
38 a specific purpose] and can[, therefore,] be reused or recycled for [the same or other] some purpose.
39 (c) "Recycling," which means any process by which solid waste materials are transformed into
40 new products in such a manner that the original products may lose their identity.
41 (d) "Reuse," which means the return of a commodity into the economic stream for use in the
42 same kind of application as before without change in its identity.
43 [(23)] (25) "Solid waste collection service" or "service" means the collection, transportation or
l` 44 disposal of or resource recovery from solid wastes but does not include that part of a business op-
[7]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 erated under a certificate issued under ORS 822.110. !
2 [(24)] (26) "Solid waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescible wastes, including but not
3 limited to garbage, rubbish, refuse, ashes, waste paper and cardboard; sewage sludge, septic tank `
4 and cesspool pumpings or other sludge; commercial, industrial, demolition and construction wastes;
5 discarded or abandoned vehicles or parts thereof; discarded home and industrial appliances; manure,
6 vegetable or animal solid and semisolid wastes, dead animals, infectious waste as defined in ORS
7 459.387 and other wastes; but the term does not include:
8 (a) Hazardous wastes as defined in ORS 466.005.
9 (b) Materials used for fertilizer or for other productive purposes or which are salvageable as
10 such materials are used on land in agricultural operations and the growing or harvesting of crops
11 and the raising of[fowls or] animals.
12 [(25)] (27) "Solid waste management" means prevention or reduction of solid waste; management
13 of the storage, collection, transportation, treatment, utilization, processing and final disposal of solid
14 waste; or resource recovery from solid waste; and facilities necessary or convenient to such activ-
15 ities.
16 [(26)] (28) "Source separate" means that the person who last uses recyclable material separates
17. the recyclable material from solid waste.
18 [(27)] (29) "Transfer station" means a fixed or mobile facility normally used, as an adjunct of a
19 solid waste collection and disposal system or resource recovery system, between a collection route
20 and a disposal site, including but not limited to a large hopper, railroad gondola or barge.
21 [(28)] (30) "Waste" means useless or discarded materials.
22 [(29)] (31) "Wasteshed" means an area of the state having a common solid waste disposal system
23 or designated by the commission as an appropriate area of the state within which to develop a t
24 common recycling program.
25 (32) "Yard debris" includes grass clippings, leaves, hedge trimmings and similar
26 vegetative waste generated from residential property or landscaping activities, but does not
27 include stumps or similar bulky wood materials.
28 SECTION 7. ORS 459.015 is amended to read:
29 459.015. (1) The Legislative Assembly finds and declares that:
30 (a) The planning, development and operation of recycling programs is a matter of statewide
31 concern.
32 (b) The opportunity to recycle should be provided to every person in Oregon.
33 (c) There is a shortage of appropriate sites for landfills in Oregon.
34 (d) It is in the best interests of the people of Oregon to extend the useful life of [existing] solid
35 waste disposal sites by encouraging recycling and reuse of materials [whenever recycling is econom-
36 ically feasible], and by requiring solid waste to undergo volume reduction through recycling and re-
37 use measures before disposal in landfills to the maximum extent feasible. Implementation of
38 recycling and reuse measures will not only increase the useful life of solid waste disposal sites, but
39 also decrease the potential public health and safety impacts associated with landfill operation.
40 (2) In the interest of the public health, safety and welfare and in order to conserve energy and
41 natural resources, it is the policy of the State of Oregon to establish a comprehensive statewide
42 program for solid waste management which will:
43 (a) After consideration of technical and economic feasibility, establish priority in methods of
44 managing solid waste in Oregon as follows:
[8]
0 •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (A) First, to reduce the amount of solid waste generated;
C2 (B) Second, to reuse material for the purpose for which it was originally intended;
3 (C) Third, to recycle material that cannot be reused;
4 (D) Fourth, to compost material that cannot be reused or recycled;
5 [(D) Fourth] (E) Fifth, to recover energy from solid waste that cannot be reused, [or]
6 recycled[,] or composted so long as the energy recovery facility preserves the quality of air, water
7 and land resources; and
8 [(E) Fifth] (F) Sixth, to dispose of solid waste that cannot be reused, recycled, composted or
9 from which energy cannot be recovered by landfilling or other method approved by the department.
10 (b) Clearly express the Legislative Assembly's previous delegation of authority to cities and
11 counties for collection service franchising and regulation and the extension of that authority under
12 the provisions of ORS 459.005, 459.015, 459.035, 459.165 to 459.200, 459.250, 459.992 and 459.995.
13 (c) Retain primary responsibility for management of adequate solid waste management. programs
14 with [local government units] cities, counties or metropolitan service districts, reserving to the
15 state those functions necessary to assure effective programs, cooperation among [local government
16 units] cities, counties or metropolitan service districts and coordination of solid waste manage-
17 ment programs throughout the state.
18 (d) Promote, encourage and develop markets first for reusable and then for recyclable
19 material.
20 [(d)] (e) Promote research, surveys and demonstration projects to encourage resource recovery.
21 [(e)] (f) Promote research, surveys and demonstration projects to aid in developing more sani- !
22 tary, efficient and economical methods of solid waste management.
23 [(/)] (g) Provide advisory technical assistance and planning assistance to [local government units
24 and other] affected persons, in the Planning, development and implementationlementation of solid waste man-
25 agement programs.
26 [(g)] (h) Develop, in coordination with federal, state and local agencies and other affected per-
27 sons, long-range plans including regional approaches to promote reuse, to provide land reclamation
28 in sparsely populated areas, and in urban areas necessary disposal facilities for resource recovery.
29 [(h)) (i) Provide for the adoption and enforcement of[minimum] recycling rates and standards
30 as well as performance standards necessary for safe, economic and proper solid waste management.
31 [(i)] (j) Provide authority for counties to establish a coordinated program for solid waste man-
32 agement, to regulate solid waste managementand to license or franchise the providing of service
33 in the field of solid waste management.
34 [(j)] (k) Encourage utilization of the capabilities and expertise of private industry in accom-
35 plishing the purposes of ORS 459.005 to 459.105, 459.205 to 459.245 and 459.255 to 459.385.
36 We)] (L) Promote means of preventing or reducing at the source, materials which otherwise
37 would constitute solid waste.
38 [(L)1 (m) Promote application of resource recovery systems which preserve and enhance the
39 quality of air, water and land resources.
40 NOTE: Section 8 was deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered.
41 SECTION 9. ORS 459.165 is amended to read:
42 459.165. (1) As used in ORS 459.015, 459.165 to 459.200 and 459.250, the "opportunity to
43 recycle" means at least that the city, county or metropolitan service district responsible for
44 solid waste management:
191
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (a)(A) Provides a place for collecting source separated recyclable material located either at a
2 disposal site or at another location more convenient to the population being served and, if a city
3 has a population of 4,000 or more, collection at least once a month of source separated recyclable
4 material from collection service customers within the city's urban growth boundary or, where ap-
5 plicable, within the urban growth boundary established by a metropolitan service district; or
6 [(b)] (B) Provides an alternative method which complies with rules of the commission; and [.]
7 (b) Complies with the rates and program elements required under section 2 of this 1991
8 Act.
9 (2) The "opportunity to recycle" defined in subsection (1) of this section also includes a public
10 education and promotion program that:
11 (a) Gives notice to each person of the opportunity to recycle; and
12 (b) Encourages source separation of recyclable material.
13 SECTION 10. ORS 459.175 is amended to read:
14 459.175. [0) Alter the commission identifies a wasteshed, the department shall notify each affected
15 person to the extent such affected persons are known to the department, of the following:]
16 [(a) That the affected person is within the wasteshed; and]
i
17 [(b) The recyclable material for which affected persons within the wasteshed must provide the op-
18 portunity to recycle in all or part of that wasteshed.]
19 [(2)] Any affected person may:
20 [(a) Appeal to the commission the inclusion of all or part of a city, county or local government unit
1
21 in a wasteshed;]
22 [(b)] (1) Request the commission to modify the recyclable material for which the commission
23 determines the opportunity to recycle must be provided; or
24 [(c)] (2) Request a variance under ORS 459.185 [(8)].
25 SECTION 11. ORS 459.180 is amended to read:
26 459.180. [(1) Upon final determination of the wasteshed and identification of recyclable material
27 and any variance, the cities and counties within the wasteshed shall coordinate with all other affected
28 persons in the wasteshed to jointly develop a recycling report to submit to the department. The report
29 to the department shall explain how the affected persons within the wasteshed are implementing the j
30 opportunity to recycle.]
31 (1) On behalf of each wasteshed and the cities within each wasteshed, each county shall
32 submit to the department an annual report that:
33 (a) Documents how the wasteshed and the cities within the wasteshed are implementing
34 the opportunity to recycle, including the requirements of section 2 of this 1991 Act.
35 (b) Reports participation in on-route collection programs, including single family and
36 multifamily residential programs.
37 (c) Reports participation in regular onsite commercial collection programs.
38 (d) Reports for the wasteshed the type of material and the weight of each type of mate.
39 rial collected through the following means:
40 (A) On-route collection;
41 (B) Collection from commercial customers; and
42 (C) Collection at disposal site recycling depots.
43 (e) If solid waste generated in the wasteshed is disposed of outside of the state, reports
44 the total weight of waste disposed outside the state. It
[10]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (2) The metropolitan service district for Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties
2 and the cities therein in aggregate shall submit to the department an annual report that
3 includes the information required under subsection (1) of this section.
4 (3) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section and subject to the exclusions of
5 section 2 (4)(d) of this 1991 Act, each solid waste disposal site that receives solid waste, ex-
6 cept transfer stations, shall report, for each wasteshed, the weight of in-state solid waste
7 disposed of at the solid waste disposal site that was generated in each wasteshed.
8 (4) The metropolitan service district for Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties
9 and the cities therein in aggregate shall submit to the department the weight of solid waste
10 disposed of through the following facilities:
11 (a) Metropolitan service district central transfer station;
12 (b) Metropolitan service district south transfer station;
13 (c) Municipal solid waste compost facility; and
14 (d) Any disposal facility or transfer facility owned, operated or under contract by the
15 metropolitan service district.
16 (5) The cities and counties within each wasteshed shall share proportionally in the costs
17 incurred for the preparation and submission of the annual report required under this section.
18 (6) At least annually, the department shall survey privately operated recycling and ma-
19 terial recovery facilities, including but not limited to buy back centers, drop off centers, re-
20 cycling depots other than those at permitted land disposal facilities, manufacturers and
21 distributors. The department shall collect the following information:
22 (a) By type of material for each wasteshed, the weight of in-state material collected from
23 other than on-route collection programs, both residential and commercial.
24 (b) Any other information necessary to prevent double counting of material recovered
25 or to determine if a material is recyclable.
26 (7) Information collected under subsection (6) of this section, as it relates specifically to
27 the entity's customer lists or specific amounts and types of materials collected or marketed,
28 shall be maintained as confidential by the department and exempt from disclosure under ORS
29 192.410 to 192.505. The department may use and disclose such information in aggregated
30 form.
31 (8) The information in subsections (1) to (4) and (6) of this section shall be collected and
32 reported annually on a form provided by the department beginning in 1992 for calendar year
33 1991.
34 (9) As a part of the report required under section 91 of this 1991 Act, the department
35 shall report:
36 (a) The annual weight of material disposed of per capita, by wasteshed and statewide.
37 (b) The annual recovery rate achieved by each wasteshed and statewide.
38 (c) The amount of each type of material recovered annually statewide and, based on
39 available information, the amount of each type of material recycled annually statewide.
40 (d) The status of implementation of the provisions of ORS 459.165 to 459.200.
41 (e) Participation rates for commercial and residential on-route collection by wasteshed
42 and statewide.
43 (f) Recommendations for improvements in the recycling, reuse and waste reduction pro-
44 grams.
[11]
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 1(2)1 (1 0) Unless extended by the commission upon application wider ORS 459.185 after. the of
2 fected persons show good cause for an extension, the affected persons within the wasteshed shall
3 implement the opportunity to recycle and submit the recycling report to the department [not later
4 than July 1, 19861.
5 SECTION 12. ORS 459.185 is amended to read:
6 459.185. [(1) The department shall review a recycling report submitted under ORS 459.180 to de-
1 !ermine whether the opportunity to recycle is being provided within all of the affected portion of the
R wasteshed.]
9 [(2) The department shall notify the affected persons who participated in preparing the report of
10 acceptance or disapproval of the recycling report based on written findings.]
11 [(3) If the department disapproves a recycling report:)
12 [(a) An affected person may:]
13 [(A) Request a meeting with the department to review the department's Endings, which meeting
14 may include all or some of the affected persons who prepared the report; or]
B [(B) Correct the deficiencies that the department found in the report.)
16 l(b) The department may grant a reasonable extension of time for the affected persons to correct
17 deficiencies in the recycling report.)
1s [(c) The affected persons submitting the report shall notify the department of any action taken to
19 correct a cited deficiency.]
20 1(4) In the event of disapproval and alter a reasonable extension of time to correct deficiencies in
21 the opportunity to recycle, the director of the department shall notify the commission that the affected
22 persons within a wasteshed have failed to implement the opportunity or submit a recycling report.) /
23 [(5) Upon notification under subsection (4) of this section, the commission shall hold a public [\�
24 hearing within the affected area of the wasteshed.]
25 [(6) If after the public hearing and based on the department's findings on review of the recycling
26 report and the hearing record, the commission determines that all or part of the opportunity to.recycle
27 is not being provided, the commission shall by order require the opportunity to recycle to be provided.
28 The commission order may include, but need not be limited to:]
29 [(a) The materials which are recyclable;]
30 [(b) The manner in which recyclable material is to be collected;]
31 [(c) The responsibility of each person in the solid waste collection and disposal process for pro-
32 vlding the opportunity to recycle;]
33 l(d) A timetable for development or implementation of the opportunity to recycle;l
34 [(e) Methods for providing the public education and promotion program;]
35 [(/) A requirement that as part of the recycling program: a city or county franchise to provide for
36 collection service; and]
37 [(g) Afininnum standards for the mandatory franchising.]
33 1(7) If a recycling program is ordered under this section, the department shall work with affected
39 persons and designate the responsibilities of each of them.]
40 [(8)] (1)(a) Upon written application by an affected person, the commission may, to accommodate
41 special conditions in the wasteshed or it portion thereof, grant a variance from specific requirements
42 of the rules or guidelines adopted under ORS 459.170 or [a recycling program ordered by the com-
43 mission under subsection (6) of this section] if the affected person complies with the criteria es-
44 tablished in section 4 of this 1991 Act, from the standards established in section 2 (8) of this
[12]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 1991 Act.
Oc2 (b) The commission may grant all or part of a variance under this section.
3 (c) Upon granting a variance, the corrunission may attach any condition the commission consid-
4 ers necessary to carry out the provisions of ORS 459.015, 459.165 to 459.200 and 459.250.
5 (d) In granting a variance, the commission must find that:
6 (A) Conditions exist that are beyond the control of the applicant;
7 (B) Special conditions exist that render compliance unreasonable or impractical; or
8 (C) Compliance may result in a reduction in recycling.
9 [(9A (2) An affected person may apply to the commission to extend the time permitted under
10 ORS 459.005, 459.015, 459.035, 459.165 to 459.200, 459.250, 459.992 and 459.995 for providing for all
it or a part of the opportunity to recycle or submitting a recycling report to the department. The
12 commission may:
13 (a) Grant. an extension upon a showing of good cause;
14 (b) Lnpose any necessary conditions on the extension; or
15 (c) Deny the application in whole or in part.
16 SECTION 12a. ORS 459.235 is amended to read:
17 459.235. (1) Applications for permits shall be on forms prescribed by the department. An appli-
18 cation shall contain a description of the existing and proposed operation and the existing and pro-
19 posed facilities at the site, with detailed plans and specifications for any facilities to be constructed.
20 The application shall include a recommendation by the local government unit or units having juris-
21 diction and such other information the department deems necessary in order to determine whether
/ 22 the site and solid waste disposal facilities located thereon and the operation will comply with ap-
(��` 23 plicable requirements.
24 (2) [Subject to the review of the Executive Department and the prior approval of the appropriate
25 legislative review agency,] The commission [may] shall establish a schedule of fees for disposal site
26 permits. The permit fees contained in the schedule shall be based on the anticipated cost of filing
27 and investigating the application, of issuing or denying the requested permit and of an' inspection
28 program to determine compliance or noncompliance with the permit. The permit fee shall accompany
29 the application for the permit.
30 (3) In addition to the fees imposed under subsection (2) of this section, the commission
31 shall establish a schedule of annual permit fees for the purpose of implementing this 1991
32 Act. The fees shall be assessed annually and shall be based on the amount of solid waste
33 received at the disposal site in the previous calendar year.
• 34 [01 (4) If the application is for a regional disposal facility, the applicant shall file with the de-
35 part.ment a surety bond in the form and amount established by rule by the commission. The bond
36 or financial assurance shall be executed in favor of the State of Oregon and shall be in an amount
37 as determined by the department to be reasonably necessary to protect the environment, and the
38 health, safety and welfare of the people of the state. The commission may allow the applicant to
39 substitute other financial assurance for the bond, in the form and amount the commission considers
40 satisfactory.
41 SECTION 13. ORS 459.294 is amended to read:
42 459.294. (1) In addition to the permit fees provided in ORS 459.235, the commission shall estab-
�` 43 lish a schedule of fees [to begin July 1, 1990,1 for all disposal sites that receive domestic solid waste
` 44 except transfer stations. The schedule shall be based on the estimated tonnage or the actual
[131
D-Eng. SB 66
1 tonnage, if known, received at the site and any other similar or related factors the commission finds
2 appropriate. The fees collected pursuant to the schedule shall be sufficient to assist in the funding
3 of programs to reduce the amount of domestic solid waste generated in Oregon and to reduce envi-
4 ronmental risks at domestic waste disposal sites.
5 (2) For solid waste (generated within the boundaries oll delivered to disposal facilities owned
6 or operated by a metropolitan service district, the schedule of fees, but not the permit fees provided
7 in ORS 459.235, established by the commission in subsection (1) of this section shall be levied on the
8 district, not the disposal site.
9 (3) The commission also may require submittal of information related to volumes and sources
10 of waste or recycled material if necessary to carry out the activities in ORS 459.295.
11 (4)(a) A local government that franchises or licenses a domestic solid waste site shall allow the
12 disposal site to pass through the amount of the fees established by the commission in subsection (1)
13 of this section to the users of the site.
14 (b) If a disposal site that receives domestic solid waste passes through all or a portion of the
15 fees established by the commission in subsection (1) of this section to a solid waste collector who
16 uses the site, a local government that franchises or licenses the collection of solid waste shall allow
17 the franchisee or licensee to include the amount of the fee in the solid waste collection service rate.
18 (5) The fees generated under subsection (1) of this section shall be sufficient to accomplish the
19 purposes set forth in ORS 459.295 but shall be no more than 50 cents per ton.
20 (6) There shall be a fee on solid waste generated out of state. This fee shall be an amount
21 equal to the sum of the fees established under subsection (1) of this section and section 13a
22 of this 1991 Act and shall be collected in the same manner as fees established under sub- /
23 section (1) of this section and section 13a of this 1991 Act. F
24 SECTION 13a. (1) From January 1, 1992, to December 31, 1993, the schedule of fees as estab-
25 lished by the Environmental Quality Commission under ORS 459.294 (1) is increased by 35 cents per
26 ton and shall be deposited into the General Fund and credited to an account of the Department of
27 Environmental Quality. Such moneys are continuously appropriated to the department to implement
28 the provisions of this 1991 Act.
29 (2) Beginning January 1, 1994, the schedule of fees as established by the commission under ORS
30 459.294 is increased by 31 cents per ton and shall be deposited into the General Fund and credited
31 to an account of the department. Stich moneys are continuously appropriated to the department to
32 implement the provisions, excluding section 51, of this 1991 Act.
33 SECTION 13b. The Department of Environmental Quality shall study funding alternatives for
34 the management of household hazardous waste including the provisions of section 51 of this Act, and
35 make recommendations for long-term funding to the Sixty-seventh Legislative Assembly.
36 SECTION 14. ORS 459.995 is amended to read:
37 459.995. (1) In addition to any other penalty provided by law:
38 (a) Any person who violates ORS 459.165 to 459.200, 459.205, 459.270 or the provisions of ORS
39 459.180, 459.188, 459.190, 459.195, 459.710 or 459.715 or the provisions of ORS 459.386 to 459.400 or
40 section 29, 34 or 34a to 34c of this 1991 Act or any rule or order of the Environmental Quality
41 Commission pertaining to the disposal, collection, storage or reuse or recycling of solid wastes, as
42 defined by ORS 459.005, shall incur a civil penalty notto exceed $500 a day for each day of the vi-
43 olation.
44 (b) Any person who violates the provisions of ORS 459.420 to 459.426 shall incur a civil penalty
1141
D-Eng. SB 66
1 not to exceed $500 for each violation. Each battery that is disposed of improperly shall be a separate
2 violation. Each day an establishment fails to post the notice required under ORS 459.426 shall be a
3 separate violation.
4 (2) The civil penalty authorized by subsection (1) of this section shall be established, imposed,
5 collected and appealed in the same manner as civil penalties are established, imposed and collected
6 under ORS 448.305, 454.010 to 454.040, 454.205 to 454.255, 454.405, 454.425, 454.505 to 454.535, 454.605
7 to 454.745 and ORS chapter 468.
8 SECTION 15. Section 16 of this Act is added to and made a part of ORS chapter 90.
9 SECTION 16. (1) In a city or the county within the urban growth boundary of a city that has
10 implemented multifamily recycling service, a landlord who has five or more residential dwelling
11 units on a single premises or five or more manufactured dwellings in a single facility shall at all
12 times during tenancy provide to all tenants:
13 (a) A separate location for containers or depots for at least four principal recyclable materials
14 or for the number of materials required to be collected under the residential on-route collection
15 program, whichever is less, adequate to hold the reasonably anticipated volume of each material;
16 (b) Regular collection service of the source separated recyclable materials; and
17 (c) Notice at least once a year of the opportunity to recycle with a description of the location
18 of the containers or depots on the premises and information about how to recycle. New tenants shall
19 be notified of the opportunity to recycle at the time of entering into a rental agreement.
20 (2) As used in this section, "recyclable material" and "source separate" have the meaning given
21 those terms in ORS 459.005.
22 SECTION 17. Sections 18 to 31 and 33 to 34e of this Act are added to and made a part of ORS
23 459.165 to 459.200.
24 SECTION 18. (1) On or before January 1, 1994, the Environmental Quality Commission shall
25 adopt a statewide integrated solid waste management plan. The plan shall include, but need not be
26 limited to:
27 (a) Source reduction;
28 (b) Recycling;
29 (c) Solid waste collection and processing;
30 (d) Composting and energy recovery;
31 (e) Incineration;
32 (f) Disposal;
33 (g) Disposal capacity and facility siting; and
34 (h) Transportation.
35 (2) The statewide integrated solid waste management plan shall be developed in consultation
36 with local government, the Economic Development Department and other appropriate state and re-
37 gional agencies, commissions and task forces. The plan shall address integrated solid waste man-
38 agement for at least 10 years into the future. The department shall review the plan every two years
39 and the commission shall revise the plan at regular intervals in order to allow local governments
40 to take advantage of the data and analysis in the state plan.
41 SECTION 19. As used in sections 21 to 25 of this 1991 Act, "compost" means the product re-
42 sulting from the controlled biological decomposition of organic wastes that are source separated
43 from the municipal solid waste stream.
44 NOTE: Section 20 was deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered.
(151
0 •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 SECTION 21. In consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality and affected state
2 and local agencies, the Department of General Services shall adopt rules for the purchase by the
3 State of Oregon of compost and sewage sludge. The rules shall designate the state minimum pur-
4 chasing standards. The rules shall encourage the use of compost and sludge without jeopardizing the
5 safety and health of the citizens of the state or the environment.
6 SECTION 22. On or after January 1, 1992, the State Forestry Department, the State Parks and
7 Recreation Department., the Department. of Transportation and the Department. of General Services,
8 in cooperation with the Department. of Environmental Quality, shall each identify and evaluate uses
9 for compost and environmentally safe sewage sludge in public land maintenance and rehabilitation
10 projects, state landscaping projects and park and recreational area maintenance programs. The re-
11 sults of the evaluation shall be submitted to the Department. of Environmental Quality not later than
12 September 1, 1992. The Department of Environmental Quality shall include the results of the eval-
13 uation in the report submitted under section 91 of this 1991 Act.
14 SECTION 23. Based on the evaluation under section 22 of this 1991 Act, on or after January
15 1, 1994, the State Forestry Department., the State Parks and Recreation Department, the Department
16 of Transportation and the Department. of General Services shall initiate programs that use compost
17 or sewage sludge in place of, or to supplement, soil amendments, ground cover materials, mulching
18 materials or other similar products for which compostcan be used as an effective substitute.
19 NOTE: Section 24 was deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered.
20 SECTION 25. After January 1, 1994, any state agency that prepares a request for bid for soil
21 amendments, ground cover materials, mulching materials or other similar products shall first deter-
22 mine that compost or sewage sludge is not available in adequate quantities, cannot practically be
23 used for the intended applications, would jeopardize the intended project results or would be used F
24 in combination with a fertilizer or other similar product.
25 SECTION 26. As used in sections 26 to 31 of this 1991 Act:
26 (1) "Conswner of newsprint" means a person who uses newsprint in a commercial or government
27 printing or publishing operation.
28 (2) "Newsprint" means paper meeting the specifications for Standard Newsprint Paper and Roto
29 P Newsprint Paper as set forth in the current edition of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
P
30 States for such products.
31 (3) "Post-consumer waste" means a material that would normally be disposed of as a solid waste,
32 having completed its life cycle as a consumer or manufacturing item.
33 (4) "Recycled-content newsprint" means newsprint that includes post-consumer waste paper.
34 SECTION 27. Unless exempted under section 30 of this 1991 Act, on and after January 1, 1995,
35 every consumer of newsprint in Oregon shall insure that at. least 7.5 percent of the annual aggregate
36 fiber content of all newsprint used by the consumer of newsprint is composed of post-consumer waste
37 paper, if.
38 (1) Recycled-content newsprint is available at. the same or lower weighted net price compared
39 to that of newsprint made from virgin material;
P g
40 (2) The average mechanical and optical properties of recycled•content newsprint from any indi-
41 vidual mill measured quarterly must meet or exceed the average mechanical and optical properties
42 of all newsprint produced in the northwest as reported in the most current quarterly American
43 Newspaper Publisher Association Newsprint. Quality Program Special Report; and
44 (3) The recycled-content newsprint is available within the same period of time as virgin material.
[161
i i
D-Eng. SB 66
1 SECTION 28. Each person who supplies a consumer of newsprint with newsprint shall report
(lam 2 with each supply the amounts of post.-consumer waste contained in each shipment to each consumer
i
3 of newsprint. If a shipment contains no post-consumer waste paper, the supplier shall so report.
4 SECTION 29. (1) No later than February 28, 1992, and annually by the same date thereafter,
5 each consumer of newsprint shall report to the Department of Environmental Quality the following
6 information for the previous calendar year:
7 (a) The amount of newsprint used in short tons;
8 (b) The amount of recycled-content newsprint used in short tons; and
9 (c) The aggregate recycled content of the newsprint used as a percent.
10 (2) If a consumer of newsprint cannot obtain sufficient amounts of recycled-content newsprint
it during the year because of one or more of the factors described in section 27 of this 1991 Act, the
12 report submitted by February 28, 1996, shall include such information.
13 SECTION 30. (1) The Oregon Newsprint Recycling Task Force is created. Not later than 90
14 days after the effective date of this 1991 Act, the members of the Oregon Newsprint Recycling Task
15 Force shall be appointed.
16 (2) The Oregon Newsprint Recycling Task Force shall:
17 (a) Assess the availability of recycled newsprint in Oregon;
18 (b) Determine the actions the state could take to increase the availability of recycled-content
19 newsprint; and
20 (c) Assess the need for statewide voluntary guidelines and enter into voluntary agreements on
21 behalf of the state that commit the parties to a program for the use of recycled-content newsprint
22 that meets the criteria set forth in section 27 of this 1991 Act. The agreements under this paragraph
23 shall comply with the criteria set forth in subsection (4) of this section.
24 (3) The task force shall consist of eight members appointed in the following manner: j
25 (a) One shall be appointed by the President of the Senate to represent the Legislative Assembly;
26 (b) One shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives to represent the
27 Legislative Assembl • and
28 (c) Six shall be appointed by the Governor, one each representing the following, one of whom
29 shall serve as chairperson:
30 (A) The conunercial printing industry;
31 (B) Daily newspapers;
32 (C) Weekly newspapers;
33 (D) The recycling industry;
34 (E) The paper manufacturing industry; and
35 (F) The environmental community.
36 (4) The task force shall accept a voluntary agreement executed under subsection (2) of this
37 section by a recognized association whose members include consumers of newsprint or by an indi-
38 vidual firm thatis not a member of an association if the agreement includes commitment by the
39 members collectively or a firm individually to meet a goal of 25 percent of the annual aggregate fi-
40 ber content of newsprint used by association members or a firm individually being composed of
41 post-consumer waste for the calendar year 1995 and every year thereafter.
42 (5) A firm or the members of an association described in subsection (4) of this section shall be
43 exempt from the requirements of section 27 of this 1991 Act if-
44
E44 (a) The association or firm enters into a voluntary agreement under this section; and
171
0 i
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (b) The goal established under subsection (4) of this section for January 1, 1995, and included
2 in the voluntary agreement is achieved.
3 (6) The Oregon Newsprint Recycling Task Force shall report annually to the appropriate legis-
4 lative committee. Not later than January 1, 1997, the task force shall report to the appropriate
5 legislative committee whether recommended changes to the established goal of 7.5 percent of total
6 content of newsprint consumed are appropriate.
7 (7) The Department of Environmental Quality shall provide staff assistance to the task force.
8 The Department of Environmental Quality may delegate certain administrative responsibilities of the
9 task force to a recognized trade association.
10 (8) As used in this section, "newspaper" has the meaning given in ORS 193.010.
11 SECTION 31. Sections 26 to 29 of this 1991 Act do not apply to newsprint purchased before
12 January 1, 1992.
13 SECTION 32. Section 30 of this Act is repealed January 1, 1998.
14 SECTION 33. (1) On and after January 1, 1995, every directory publisher shall insure that di-
15 rectories distributed in Oregon:
16 (a) Have a minimum recycled content of at least 25 percent by weight, with no less than 15
17 percent of the total weight consisting of post-consumer waste, if-
is (A) The recycled-content paper is available on the market; and
19 (B) The recycled-content paper is of the same quality as paper made from virgin material;
20 (b) Use bindings that do not impede recycling; and
21 (c) Use inks that do not impede recycling.
22 (2) For each local jurisdiction where directories are distributed, directory publishers will coop-
23 erate with local government agencies to insure that recycling opportunities exist for directories at
24 the time the directories are distributed provided markets exist for the directories.
25 (3) The department shall develop a report format and survey directory publishers in Oregon on
26 an annual basis to determine whether the publishers are meeting the requirements under subsections
27 (1) and (2) of this section.
28 (4) As used in this section, "directory" means a telephone directory that weighs one pound or
29 more for a local jurisdiction in Oregon distributed in this state.
30 SECTION 34. (1) Beginning February 28, 1992, and annually thereafter, every glass container
31 manufacturer shall report to the department, in accordance with a method established by the de-
32 partment, the total amount, in tons, of new glass food, drink and beverage containers made or sold
33 in Oregon by the glass container ►manufacturer, and the tons of recycled glass used in manufacturing
34 the new container.
35 (2) Each glass container manufacturer shall use the following minimum percentages of recycled
36 glass in manufacturing glass food, drink or beverage containers:
37 (a) Thirty-five percent on and after January 1, 1995.
38 (b) Fifty percent on and after January 1, 2000.
39 (3) As used in this section, "glass container manufacturer" means a person that manufactures
40 commercial containers whose principal component part consists of virgin glass, recycled glass or
41 post-consumer glass, or any combination thereof, for sale in Oregon, or if manufactured in Oregon,
42 for export to other states or countries. "Glass container manufacturer" includes but is not limited
43 to all commercial manufacturing operations that produce beverage containers, food or drink pack-
44 aging material made primarily of glass, or any combination of both of these items.
[181
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 SECTION 34a. As used in sections 34a to 34e of this 1991 Act:
(� 2 (1) "Department" means the Department of Environmental Quality.
\ 3 (2) "Manufacturer" means the producer or generator of a packaged product which is sold or
4 offered for sale in Oregon in a rigid plastic container.
5 (3) "Package" means any container used to protect, store, contain, transport, display or sell
6 products.
7 (4) "Product-associated package" means a brand-specific rigid plastic container line, which may
8 have one or more sizes, shapes or designs and which is used in conjunction with a particular, ge-
9 neric product line.
10 (5) "Recycled content" means the portion of a package's weight that is composed of recycled
11 material, as determined by a material balance approach that calculates total recycled material input
12 as a percentage of total material input in the manufacture of the package.
13 (6) "Recycled material" means a material that would otherwise be destined for solid waste dis-
14 posal, having completed its intended end use or product life cycle. Recycled material does not in-
15 elude materials and by-products generated from, and commonly reused 'within, an original
16 manufacturing and fabrication process.
17 (7) "Reusable package" means a package that is used five or more times for the same or sub-
18 stantially similar use.
19 (8) "Rigid plastic container" means any package composed predominantly of plastic resin which
20 has a relatively inflexible finite shape or form with a minimum capacity of eight ounces and a
21 maximum capacity of five gallons, and that is capable of maintaining its shape while holding other
22 products.
23 SECTION 34b. (1) Except as provided in section 34c (3) of this 1991 Act, every manufacturer
24 of rigid plastic containers sold, offered for sale or used in association with the sale or offer for sale
25 of products in Oregon shall insure that the container meets one of the following criteria:
26 (a) Contains 25 percent recycled content by January 1, 1995;
27 (b) Is made of plastic that is being recycled in Oregon at a rate of 25 percent by January 1, 1995;
28 or
29 (c) Is a reusable package.
30 (2) A manufacturer's rigid plastic container shall meet the requirements in paragraph (b) of
31 subsection (1) of this section if the container meets one of the following criteria:
32 (a) It is a rigid plastic container and rigid plastic containers, in the aggregate, are being recy-
33 cled in the state at a rate of 25 percent by January 1, 1995;
34 (b) It is a specified type of rigid plastic container and that type of rigid plastic container, in the
35 aggregate, is being recycled in the state at a rate of 25 percent by January 1, 1995; or
36 (c) It is a particular product-associated package and that type of package, in the aggregate, is
37 being recycled in the state at a rate of 25 percent by January 1, 1995.
38 SECTION 34c. (1) On or before March 1, 1995, and annually on or before March 1 thereafter,
39 each manufacturer of rigid plastic containers shall submit a certification to the department. The
40 certification shall include the total tons of rigid plastic containers the manufacturer produced or
41 sold for sale or distribution in the state by resin type, the tons of recycled materials used in man.
42 ufacturing those rigid plastic containers and other information the department may require to ad-
43.
d-43 minister the requirements of sections 34a to 34d of this 1991 Act. Proprietary information included
44 in a report or certification submitted to the department under this section shall not be made avail-
[191
D-Eng. SB 66
1 able to the general public. Manufacturers shall keep records documenting the certification for
2 presentation to the department upon its request. Each manufacturer required to make a certif
3 ication under this section may be audited by the department.
4 (2) Each manufacturer shall certify that the manufacturer has complied with one or more of the
5 requirements of section 34b of this 1991 Act during the preceding calendar year for all of the man-
6 ufacturer's rigid plastic containers except any rigid plastic containers subject to subsection (3) of
7 this section.
8 (3) For any rigid plastic containers not certified under subsection (2) of this section, each man-
9 ufacturer shall certify that such containers are exempt from the requirements of section 34b of this
10 1991 Act for one of the following reasons:
11 (a) The packages are used for medication prescribed by physicians.
12 (b) The packages are associated with products produced in or brought into the state that are
13 destined for shipment. to other destinations outside the state, and which remain with such products
14 upon such shipment..
15 (c) The packaging is necessary to provide tamper-resistant seals for public health purposes.
16 (d) The packages are reduced packages. A package shall qualify as reduced when the ratio of
17 package weightper unit of product has been reduced by at least 10 percent when compared with
18 the packaging used for the same product by the same packager five years earlier. In no case may
19 packaging reduction be achieved, for purposes of this paragraph, by substituting a different material
20 category for a material that constituted a substantial part of the packaging in question, or by
21 packaging changes that adversely impact the potential for the package to be recycled or be made
22 of recycled content. Exemptions under this paragraph shall be limited to five years, shall not be
23 renewable and shall not be applicable to packages for which the ratio of package weight per unit
24 of product increased after January 1, 1990.
25 (e) There has been substantial investment in achieving the recycling goal, viable markets for the
26 material, if collected, can be demonstrated, the material is within five percent of the goal, there is
27 substantial evidence of accelerating recycling rates and reasonable projections show that the mate-
28 rial will meet the goal within two years.
29 SECTION 34d. (1) A local government shall provide the opportunity to recycle rigid plastic
30 containers in metropolitan and urban wastesheds when there is a stable market price for those
31 containers that equals or exceeds 75 percent of the necessary and reasonable collection costs for
32 those containers.
33 (2) The Recycling Markets Development Council shall determine:
34 (a) if and when a stable market. exists.
35 (b) Whether the requirements of this section are met for any particular wasteshed.
36 SECTION 34e. (1) On or before January 1, 1993, the department shall report to the Legislative
37 Assembly on whether to grant an exemption from the criteria established by section 34b of this 1991
38 Act for rigid plastic containers that cannotmeet the recycled content criterion and remain in com-
39 pliance with United States Food and Drug Administration regulations.
40 (2) On or before January 1, 1997, the department shall review certifications provided pursuant
41 to section 34c of this 1991 Act and report to the Legislative Assembly on the status of plastic re-
42 cycling programs in the state, including, but not limited to, participation rates, estimates of the
43 quantities and qualities of recycled materials and status of markets for plastic recycled materials.
44 The report may be used to recommend which rigid plastic containers, if any, should be required to
[201
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 contain higher or lower recycled content or recycling rate standards for the year 2000.
2 SECTION 35. (1) By January 1, 1995, the Department of Education, in cooperation with the
3 Department of Environmental Quality, shall integrate a recycling and waste reduction component
4 into a required curriculum for all Oregon students in grades kindergarten through 12.
5 (2) The Department of Environmental Quality, in cooperation with the Department of Education,
6 as appropriate in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this subsection, shall provide statewide promotion, edu-
7 cation and technical assistance to local government units and schools in each wasteshed to increase
8 participation in recycling. The assistance provided shall include but need notbe limited to:
9 (a) Beginning July 1, 1993, developing a current teacher's guide which shall be supplied to every
10 school in the state for use in complying with this section. The Department of Environmental Quality
11 first shall provide a current teacher's guide by July 1, 1993, and at a minimum, every fourth year
12 thereafter, shall update, revise and replace the teacher's guide as necessary to keep the teacher's
13 guide current and effective. The teacher's guide also shall be available to local government units
14 and recycling educators upon request. The Department. of Environmental Quality shall participate
15 each year as requested in teacher in-service workshops to present and facilitate use of the teacher's
16 guide.
17 (b) Beginning July 1, 1993, providing professionally produced informational materials including
18 butnot limited to camera-ready art and recycling and waste reduction copy for use by local gov-
19 ernment units, schools or recycling educators in each wasteshed for public information correspond-
20 ence, brochures, flyers, newsletters and news releases, camera-ready newspaper public service
21 advertisements and two annual workshops on recycling and waste reduction education and pro-
22 motion, one to be held within and one to be held outside, the Portland metropolitan area. The De- I
\` 23 partment of Environmental Quality first shall provide this material by July 1, 1993, and shall revise
24 the material annually to keep the information presented current and effective.
25 (c) On or before July 1, 1993, providing professionally produced instructional audiovisual mate-
26 rials to each school in the state to be used as part of the school's recycling and waste reduction
27 education component. The audiovisual materials shall be appropriate to the grade level of the school
28 to which they are supplied and shall be reviewed every two years and updated as necessary to keep
29 the information presented current and effective. The materials also shall be available to local gov-
30 ernment units and recycling educators upon request.
31 SECTION 36. The Department of Education shall report to the Sixty-seventh Legislative As-
32 sembly on the development and implementation of the integrated solid waste management curric-
33 ulum and recycling and waste reduction education component established pursuant to section 35 of
34 this Act.
35 SECTION 37. Sections 38 to 52 of this Act are added to and made a part of ORS 459.005 to
36 459.426.
37 SECTION 38. On and after January 1, 1992, any retail establishment that offers plastic bags to
38 customers for purchases of goods made at the establishment shall offer at the location where the
39 customer pays for the goods, paper bags as an alternative to plastic bags and inform customers that
40 a choice is available. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as requiring retail establishments
41 to use plastic bags.
42 SECTION 39. (1) No person shall dispose of and no disposal site operator shall knowingly ac-
43 cept for disposal the following types of solid waste at a solid waste disposal site: i
44 (a) Discarded or abandoned vehicles;
[21]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (b) Discarded large home or industrial appliances; /
2 (c) Used oil;
3 (d) Tires; or
4 (e) Lead-acid batteries.
5 (2) As used in this section, "used oil" has the meaning given that term in ORS 468.850.
6 (3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a disposal site operator from accepting and storing, for
7 purposes of recycling or recovering, any of the types of solid waste listed in subsection (1) of this
8 section.
9 NOTE: Sections 40 to 44 were deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered.
10 SECTION 45. (1) The Recycling Markets Development Council is created. The council shall
11 consist. of 12 members at least. one of whom shall have expertise in national and international mar-
12 ket development. The members appointed to the council shall represent the following interests:
13 (a) Local government;
14 (b) Solid waste collectors;
15 (c) Environmental organizations;
16 (d) Glass industry;
17 (e) End-product manufacturers of glass;
18 (1) Paper industry;
19 (g) End-product manufacturers of paper;
20 (h) End-product manufacturers of plastic;
21 (i) Persons with expertise in the collection and sorting of recyclable materials;
22 (j) Retail industry;
23 (k) Processors of recovered materials; and
24 (L) Plastics industry.
25 (2) The Governor shall appoint the members of the council, one of whom shall be designated as
26 chairperson. Members of the council serve at the pleasure of the Governor and shall serve a term
27 of two years. Any vacancy on the council shall be filled by the Governor. In making the appoint-
28 ments to the council, the Governor shall consider:
29 (a) The person's knowledge of recycling;
30 (b) Geographic representation from throughout the state;
31 (c) The size of the business represented; and
32 (d) Expertise in market development.
33 (3) The council shall meet at least quarterly.
34 (4) The council shall:
35 (a) Remain current with national and international market development activities;
36 (b) Develop statewide market strategies for each secondary commodity;
37 (c) Develop communication with and be a liaison to market development committees represent-
38 ing other states within the region;
39 (d) Encourage uniform recycling definitions and standards throughout the states in the region;
40 (e) Encourage the expansion of existing businesses and the recruitment of businesses into the
41 region that use recovered materials from Oregon;
42 (f) Identify and evaluate financial and other incentives to attract new businesses to Oregon or
43 to expand existing businesses that. can use recovered materials from Oregon; and
44 (g) Promote the purchase of products made from recovered materials.
1221
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (5) The council shall submit a report to the Sixty-seventh Legislative Assembly. The report shall
2 include but need not be limited to:
3 (a) Accomplishments of the council to date;
4 (b) Additional activities necessary to strengthen markets for recycled materials;
5 (c) Statutory additions or changes necessary to assist the council in carrying out its duties, in-
6 eluding implementing the market development plans developed by the council's divisions; and
7 (d) The specific uses intended for the Oregon Recycling Markets Development Fund created
8 under section 48 of this 1991 Act..
9 SECTION 46. (1) The council shall establish three industry divisions to examine specific market
10 development problems related to glass, paper and plastic. In addition to the glass, paper and plastic
11 divisions, the council may establish ad hoc divisions to address market development problems not
12 appropriately addressed by the glass, paper and plastic divisions. The council shall determine the
13 organizational structure for the ad hoc divisions.
14 (2) The chairperson of the glass, paper and plastic divisions shall be the merpber of the council
15 appointed by the Governor as the representative of the glass, paper or plastic industry, respectively.
16 In addition, the council shall select at least four but not more than eight members for each division
17 from representatives of each industry. Each division's members shall represent fairly the primary
18 participants in each industry's Oregon economy, including material suppliers and manufacturers. l
19 (3) The council shall define specific market problems for each secondary commodity and the
20 appropriate division shall address each problem in the following manner:
21 (a) The division shall analyze current plant capacity and market demand issues for the second-
22 ary commodity in question;
23 (b) The division shall determine whether the industry has insufficient private development ac-
24 tivity, planned or existing, to warrant additional market development; and
25 (c) If the division finds additional market development is warranted, the division shall establish
26 a development plan for expanding markets for the secondary commodity, including a recommended
27 capital development fund to finance the plan and a proposal for assessment of the industry to fund
28 the market development plan.
29 (4) Each division shall report its activities and findings to the council on a quarterly basis and
30 shall present an interim report to the council upon the council's request. The council may approve
31 each division's market development plan and industry assessment mechanism. Upon each request
32 each division shall report to the appropriate joint interim committee. Before implementing any as-
33 sessment mechanism, the council shall submit the proposal to the Legislative Assembly.
34 (5) Until June 30, 1993, all service and expense items of the council and its divisions shall be
35 provided by council members or industry.
36 SECTION 47. Sections 45, 46, 48 and 49 of this 1991 Act are repealed on January 1, 1996.
I
37 SECTION 48. (1) The Oregon Recycling Markets Development Fund is created in the State
38 Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund. Except as otherwise provided by law, all
39 moneys received by the council shall be paid into the State Treasury and credited to the fund. In-
40 terest earnings on all moneys in the fund shall be retained in the fund.
41 (2) The Oregon Recycling Markets Development Fund shall consist of-
42
f42 (a) Moneys generated as assessments under section 46 of this 1991 Act.
43 (b) Moneys from any private gifts, grants or donations made to the fund.
44 (3) Any funds generated under a division's industry assessment structure shall be placed in a
i�
(231
• i
D-Eng. SB 66
1 subaccount and shall be used only to fund that division's market development plan and the expenses
2 of the council.
3 SECTION 49. (1) Moneys in the Oregon Recycling Markets Development Fund are continuously
4 appropriated to the Recycling Markets Development Council to be used:
5 (a) To provide low interest loans to develop a secondary materials processing infrastructure for
6 businesses engaged in processing secondary materials.
7 (b) For purposes set forth in each division's market development plan.
8 (c) To pay the reasonable and necessary expenses of the council.
9 (d) To provide grants for section 501(c)(3) organizations engaged in collecting, separating or
10 processing secondary commodities.
11 (2) As used in this section, "section 501(c)(3) organization" means an organization exempt under
12 section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended and in effect on the effective date of this
13 1991 Act.
14 SECTION 50. Effective January 1, 1996, section 34d of this Act is amended to read:
15 Sec. 34d. [(1)] A local government shall provide the opportunity to recycle rigid plastic con-
16 tainers in metropolitan and urban wastesheds when there is a stable market price for those con-
17 tainers that equals or exceeds 75 percent of the necessary and reasonable collection costs for those
18 containers.
19 [(2) The Recycling Markets Development Council shall determine:]
20 [(a) If and when a stable market exists.]
21 [(b) Whether the requirements of this section are met for any particular wasteshed.l
22 SECTION 51. The Department of Environmental Quality may contract with a hazardous waste
23 collection service to provide for the statewide collection of household hazardous waste.
24 SECTION 52. The Department of Environmental Quality shall provide technical assistance to
25 cities, counties or metropolitan service districts in the development, revision, amendment and im-
26 plementation of local solid waste reduction, reusing, recycling and solid waste management pro-
27 grams that comply with the opportunity to recycle established in ORS 459.165. The department shall
28 give special emphasis to assisting rural and remote counties.
29 NOTE: Sections 53 to 58 were deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered.
30 SECTION 59. ORS 279.731 is amended to read:
31 279.731. As used in ORS 279.731 to 279.739, unless the contest otherwise requires:
32 (1) "Post-consumer waste" means a finished material which would normally be disposed of as
33 solid waste, having completed its life cycle as a consumer item. "Post-consumer waste" does
34 not include manufacturing waste.
35 (2) "Public agency" means a county, city, special district or other public or municipal
36 corporation, and any instrumentality thereof.
37 (3) "Recycled material" means any material that would otherwise be a useless, unwanted
38 or discarded material except for the fact that the material still has useful physical or
39 chemical properties after serving a specific purpose and can, therefore, be reused or recy-
40 cled.
41 [(2)] (4) "Recycled paper" means a paper product with not less than:
42 (a) Fifty percent of its total weight consisting of secondary waste materials; or
43 (b) Twenty-five percent of its total weight consisting of post-consumer waste.
44 (5) "Recycled product" means all materials, goods and supplies, not less than 50 percent
[241
D-Eng. SB 66
1 of the total weight of which consists of secondary and post-consumer waste with not less
2 than 10 percent of its total weight consisting of post-consumer waste. "Recycled product"
3 also includes any product that could have been disposed of as solid waste, having completed
4 its life cycle as a consumer item, but otherwise is refurbished for reuse without substantial
5 alteration of the product's form.
6 [(3)] (6) "Secondary waste materials" means fragments of products or finished products of a
7 manufacturing process which has converted a virgin resource into a commodity of real economic
8 value, and includes post-consumer waste, but does not include excess virgin resources of the
9 manufacturing process. For paper, "secondary waste materials" does not include fibrous
10 waste generated during the manufacturing process such as fibers recovered from waste wa-
ll ter or trimmings of paper machine rolls, mill broke, wood slabs, chips, sawdust or other wood
12 residue from a manufacturing process.
13 [NA (7) "State agency" includes the Legislative Assembly, the courts and their officers and
14 committees and the constitutional state officers.
15 SECTION 60. ORS 279.733 is amended to read:
16 279.733. (1) All state agencies purchasing supplies, materials, equipment or personal services
17 shall:
is VIA (a) Review their procurement specifications currently utilized in order to eliminate, wher-
19 ever economically feasible, discrimination against the procurement of recovered resources or recy-
20 cled materials.
21 [(2)] (b) Provide incentives, wherever economically feasible, in all procurement specifications
�j 22 issued by them for the maximum possible use of recovered resources and recycled materials.
�l 23 [(3)] (c) Develop purchasing practices which, to the maximum extent economically feasible, as-
24 sure purchase of materials which are recycled or which may be recycled or reused when discarded.
25 [(4)) (d) Establish management practices which minimize the volume of solid waste generated
26 by [them by] reusing paper, envelopes, containers and all types of packaging and by limiting the
27 amount of materials consumed and discarded.
28 [(5)] (e) Use and require persons with whom they contract to use, in the performance of the
29 contract work, to the maximum extent economically feasible, recycled paper.
30 (2) Any invitation to bid or request for proposal under ORS chapter 279 shall include the fol-
31 lowing language: "Vendors shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent economically fea-
32 sible in the performance of the contract work set forth in this document."
33 SECTION 61. ORS 279.739 is amended to read:
34 279.739. (1) Notwithstanding provisions of law requiring a state agency or a public agency to
35 enter into contracts with the lowest responsible bidder and subject to subsection (2) of this section,
36 any state agency or public agency charged with the purchase of materials and supplies for any
37 public use [may, in its discretion,] shall give preference to the purchase of materials and supplies
38 manufactured from recycled materials.
39 (2) A state agency or public agency [may] shall give preference to materials and supplies
40 manufactured'from recycled materials [only] if.
41 [(a) The bids of the persons or manufacturing concerns supplying the recycled materials, or the
42 prices quoted by them, do not exceed by more than rue percent the lowest bid or prices quoted by
43 persons and manufacturing concerns offering nonrecycled materials; and]
44 [(b) The public agency finds that the public good will be served thereby.]
[25]
. •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (a) The recycled product is available;
2 (b) The recycled product meets applicable standards;
3 recycled product can be substituted for a comparable nonrec cled product; and
(c) The y p p y P I
4 (d) Recycled product costs do not exceed the costs of nonrecycled products by more than
5 five percent.
6 [(3) As used in this section:]
7 [(a) "Public agency" means a county, city, special district, or other public and municipal eorpo-
8 rations, and any instrumentality thereof]
9 [(b) "Recycled material" means any material that would otherwise be a useless, unwanted or dis-
10 carded material except for the fact that the material still has useful physical or chemical properties
11 after seruing a specific purpose and can, therefore, be reused or recycled.]
12 (3) At its discretion, a state or public agency may give preference to the purchase of
13 materials and supplies manufactured from recycled materials, even if the cost differential
14 exceeds the five percent preference set forth in subsection (2) of this section.
7 a ua
15 (4) State agencies, unless otherwise specified m ORS 279.731 to 279.739, and en-
public g
16 cies may give preference to the suppliers of recycled products and recycled paper or to pro-
17 ducts that reduce the amount of waste generated. State agencies, unless otherwise specified
18 in ORS 279.731 to 279.739, and public agencies may determine the amount of this preference.
19 (5) In any bid in which the state has reserved the right to make multiple awards, the
20 recycled product or recycled paper preference shall be applied to the extent possible to
21 maximize the dollar participation of firms offering recycled products or recycled paper in the
22 contract award.
23 (6) A state or public agency shall require the bidder to specify the minimum, if not exact,
24 percentage of recycled paper in paper products or recycled product in products offered, and
25 both the post-consumer and secondary waste content regardless of whether the product
26 meets the percentage of recycled material specified for recycled paper or recycled products
27 in ORS 279.731. For paper products, a state agency or public agency also shall require that
28 the bidder specify the fiber type. The contractor may certify a zero percent recycled paper
29 or product. All contract provisions impeding the consideration of products with recycled pa-
30 per or recycled products shall be deleted in favor of performance standards.
31 (7) The department shall review and work with state agencies to develop procurement
32 specifications that encourage the use of recycled products whenever quality of a recycled
33 product is functionally equal to the same product manufactured with virgin resources. Ex-
34 cept for specifications that have been established to preserve the public health and safety,
35 all procurement and purchasing specifications shall be established in a manner that encour-
36 ages procurement and purchase of recycled products.
37 (8) All public and state agencies shall establish purchasing practices that assure, to the
38 maximum extent economically feasible, purchase of materials, goods and supplies that may
39 be recycled or reused when discarded.
40 SECTION 62. Sections 63 to 81 of this Act are added to and made a part of ORS 279.731 to
41 279.739.
42 SECTION 63. (1) The Legislative Assembly finds that:
43 (a) It is the policy of the state to conserve and protect its resources. The maintenance of a
44 quality environment for the people of this state now and in the future is a matter of statewide
[26]
• 0
D-Eng. SB 66
1 concern.
(� 2 (b) The volume of solid waste generated within the state, an increased rate in the consumption
�\ 3 of products and materials, including paper products, and the absence of adequate programs and
4 procedures for the reuse and recycling of these products and materials threaten the quality of the
5 environment and well-being of the people of Oregon.
6 (2) Therefore, the Legislative Assembly declares that the policy and intent of ORS 279.731 to
7 279.739 is to improve environmental quality by providing for:
8 (a) The procurement of products made from recycled materials; and
9 (b) The recycling of waste materials.
10 SECTION 64. As used in sections 64 to 67 of this 1991 Act:
11 (1) "Industrial oil" means any compressor, turbine or bearing oil, hydraulic oil, metal-working
12 oil or refrigeration oil.
13 (2) "Lubricating oil" means any oil intended for use in an internal combustion crankcase,
14 transmission, gearbox or differential or an automobile, bus, truck, vessel, plane, train, heavy equip-
15 ment or machinery powered by an internal combustion engine.
16 (3) "Recycled oil" means used oil that has been prepared for reuse as a petroleum product by
17 refining, rerefining, reclaiming, reprocessing or other means provided that the preparation or use is
18 operationally safe, environmentally sound and complies with all laws and regulations.
19 (4) "Used oil" has the meaning given that term in ORS 468.850.
20 (5) "Virgin oil" means oil that has been refined from crude oil and that has not been used or
21 contaminated with impurities.
` 22 SECTION 65. Every state agency or public agency shall revise its procedures and specifications
23 for the purchase of lubricating oil and industrial oil to eliminate any exclusion of recycled oils and
24 any requirement that oils be manufactured from virgin materials.
25 SECTION 66. Every state agency and public agency shall require that purchases of lubricating
26 oil and industrial oil be made from the seller whose oil product contains the greater percentage of
27 recycled oil, unless a specific oil product containing recycled oil is:
28 (1) Not available within a reasonable period of time or in quantities necessary to meet. an
29 agency's needs;
30 (2) Not able to meet the performance requirements or standards recommended by the equipment
31 or vehicle manufacturer, including any warranty requirements; or
32 (3) Available only at a cost greater than five percent of the cost of comparable virgin oil pro-
33 ducts or other percent preference established by the agency under ORS 279.739 (3).
34 SECTION 67. (1) Every state agency or public agency shall establish and maintain an affirma-
35 Live program for procuring oils containing the maximum content of recycled oil.
36 (2) An affirmative program shall include but need not be limited to:
37 (a) Placement of descriptions of the preference for recycled oil products in publications used to
38 solicit bids from suppliers.
39 (b) Descriptions of the recycled oil procurement program at bidders' conferences.
40 (c) Discussion of the preference program in lubricating oil and industrial oil procurement solic-
41 itations or invitations to bid.
42 (d) Efforts to inform industry trade associations about the preference program.
43 SECTION 68. As used in sections 69 to 71 of this 1991 Act, "retreaded tire" means any tire that
44 uses an existing casing for the purpose of vulcanizing new tread to such casing that meets all per-
[27]
0
D-Eng. SB 66
1 formance and quality standards specified in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards determined
2 by the United States Department of Transportation.
3 SECTION 69. Before January 1, 1993, all state agency fleets shall participate in a one-year
4 study, conducted by the Department of General Services, that compares the quality, performance and
5 cost-effectiveness of retreaded tires to new tires. During the study, the Department of General Ser-
6 vices shall evaluate current state and federal quality standards for retreaded tires. The Department
7 of General Services shall report the results of the study to the Sixty-seventh Legislative Assembly.
8 SECTION 70. (1) Unless the study under section 69 of this 1991 Act recommends against state
9 agency acquisition of retreaded tires, and the Legislative Assembly accepts the recommendations,
10 on or before July 1, 1993, and to the extent that existing stock shall be used first, all tires for use
11 on the nonsteering wheels of state agency and public agency vehicles shall, at the next required
12 installation of tires, be equipped with retreaded tires.
13 (2) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to:
14 (a) Emergency vehicles as defined in ORS 801.260;
15 (b) Other fire suppression or emergency assistance vehicles; or
16 (c) Passenger-carrying vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of one ton or more.
17 (3) At its discretion, a state agency or public agency may elect not to use retreaded tires as
18 required under subsection (1) of this section if the cost per mile differential of retreaded tires ex-
19 ceeds the five percent preference set forth in section 61 of this 1991 Act.
20 SECTION 71. The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of
21 Environmental Quality and with representatives of the Oregon retreading industry, may adopt rules
22 for the purchase of retreaded tires by the State of Oregon. The rules shall designate the state min-
23 imum quality standards for retreaded tires. The rules shall be designed to maximize the use of re-
24 treads without jeopardizing the safety of the occupants of the vehicle or the intended end use of the
25 tire.
26 SECTION 72. (1) The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of
27 Environmental Quality, shall revise its procedures and specifications for state purchases of paper
28 products to give preference to the purchase of paper products that reduce production of solid waste
29 or contain recycled paper.
30 (2) The Department of General Services shall give a preference to the suppliers of recycled pa-
31 per. This preference shall be up to 12 percent of the lowest bid or price quoted by suppliers offering
32 nonrecycled paper products. In any bid in which the state has reserved the right to make multiple
33 awards, the recycled paper preference cost shall be applied, to the extent possible, to maximize the
34 dollar participation of recycled business in the contract award.
35 (3) To encourage the use of post-consumer waste, the Department of General Services' specifi-
36 cations shall require recycled paper contracts to be awarded to the bidder whose paper product
37 contains the greater percentage of post-consumer waste if the fitness, quality and price meet the
38 requirements in this section and the type of recycled content is consistent with the type of virgin
39 material, so that the purchase does not interfere with an existing recycling recovery program. The
40 Director of the Department of General Services shall determine:
41 (a) Whether use of any proposed paper constitutes an economic or environmental interference
42 with an existing recycling recovery program; or
43 (b) If a reasonable modification of the existing recycling recovery program, in accordance with
44 sections 75 and 76 of this 1991 Act, would allow the use of the proposed paper without economic
[28]
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 or environmental interference.
2 (4)(a) By January 1, 1993, no less than 25 percent of state agency purchases of paper products
3 shall be from recycled paper products.
4 (b) By January 1, 1995, no less than 35 percent of state agency purchases of paper products shall
5 be from recycled paper products.
6 SECTION 73. At the discretion of the individual agency director, a state agency may print a
7 symbol on paper products selected by the agency director. This symbol shall be determined by the
8 department, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, and shall be similar to
9 the following: "Printed on recycled paper." This symbol may be printed only on recycled paper.
10 SECTION 74. (1) The director, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality,
11 shall review the procurement specifications currently used by the department to eliminate, wherever
12 economically feasible, discrimination against the procurement of recycled paper.
13 (2) The director, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, shall review the
14 recycled paper specifications at least annually to consider increasing the percentage of recycled
15 paper in paper and woodpulp product purchases. The director's conclusions and recommendations
16 shall be included in the annual report required under section 81 of this 1991 Act.
17 (3) When contracting with the department for the sale of material subject to this section, the
18 contractor shall certify in writing to the contracting officer that the material offered contains the
19 minimum percentage of recycled paper required by ORS 279.731 and shall specify the minimum, if
20 not exact., percentage of secondary and post-consumer waste and fiber type in the paper products.
21 The certification shall be furnished under penalty of perjury.
22 (4) The department, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, shall estab-
23 lish purchasing practices that., to the maximum extent economically feasible, assure purchase of
24 materials that may be recycled or reused when discarded.
25 (5) The department shall make every effort to eliminate purchases of paper products considered
26 potential contaminants to the state's recycling plan under section 76 of this 1991 Act. .
27 SECTION 75. It is the intent of the Legislative Assembly that:
28 (1) For the current state waste paper collection program, the department, in consultation with
29 the Department of Environmental Quality, shall provide participating locations with public aware-
30 ness information and training to state and legislative employees, including but not limited to the
31 proper separation and disposal of recycled resources. Additionally, the department, in consultation
32 with the Department of Environmental Quality, shall provide training for personnel, including but
33 not limited to state buildings and grounds personnel responsible for the collection of waste materi-
34 als. This training shall include but not be limited to educating and training the personnel concerning
35 the separation and collection of recyclable materials.
36 (2) The department continue the current state waste paper collection program and use this
37 program as a model to develop a plan for other waste materials generated by state and legislative
38 employees.
39 (3) The department, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, shall submit
40 a new recycling plan, which includes but is not limited to the collection and sale of waste materials
41 generated by state and legislative employees. The plan shall include for each state agency, specific
42 goals relating to office materials recovered from the waste stream, and waste not recovered on a
43 per capita basis. This plan shall be submitted to the appropriate legislative policy committees on
44 or before August 31, 1992. The plan may be phased in using those office facilities and collecting
[29]
• •
D-Eng. SB 66
1 those waste materials most conducive to operation of a source separation program, but shall be fully
2 implemented by June 1, 1993.
3 (4) The collection program for each product shall be reevaluated by the director on or before
4 January 1, 1994. Subsequently, the director, in consultation with the Department of Environmental
5 Quality, upon the determination that inclusion of any particular material type would result in a net
6 revenue loss to the state, may exclude that material from the program, and shall include the direc-
7 t.or's conclusions and recommendations in the report required under section 80 of this 1991 Act. In
8 determining the net revenue loss for the collection of a specified waste material, the director shall
9 include the avoided cost to dispose of the waste material.
10 (5) No individual, group of individuals, state office, agency or its employees shall establish a
11 similar collection program or enter into agreement for a similar program unless approved by the
12 director.
13 (6)(a) If any single activity or facility of state agency fails to meet the specific goals of the plan
14 within six months after implementation of the plan, the department shall require the agency to im-
15 plement at the activity or facility actions which:
16 (A) Shall include but need not be limited to:
17 (i) A waste audit to specifically determine the best way to meet the goals;
18 (ii) An employee information and education program to inform and encourage employee partic-
19 ipat.ion; and
20 (iii) A timetable for these remedial measures to take place; and
21 (B) May include a plan or contract for janitorial services that includes collection of source
22 separated recyclables.
23 (b) As used in this subsection, "waste audit" means a systematic survey of the waste generation C
24 characteristics of a facility or agency that produces recommendations on how to most effectively
25 reduce the volume of waste materials being generated through the applied techniques of source re-
26 duction, reuse and recycling.
27 SECTION 76. After implementing a recycling plan under section 75 (3) of this 1991 Act, the
28 department, with the advice of the Department of Environmental Quality, shall establish, implement
29 and maintain a recycling plan for the Legislative Assembly, which may include all legislative offices
30 and individual member's district offices and all state offices whether in state-owned buildings or
31 leased facilities. The plan shall include provisions for recycling office paper, corrugated cardboard,
32 newsprint, beverage containers as defined in ORS 459.810, waste oil and any other material at the
33 discretion of the director, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality.
34 SECTION 77. The department may contract as necessary for the recycling of products returned
35 under section 76 of this 1991 Act.
36 SECTION 78. (1) Revenues received or cost reductions realized from the plan developed under
37 sections 72 to 77 of this 1991 Act or any other activity involving the collection and transfer of
38 recyclable materials in state and legislative offices located in state-owned and state-leased buildings,
39 such as the sale of waste materials through recycling programs operated by the department or in
40 agreement with the department, shall be used to o(T'set recycling program costs for the programs
41 developed under sections 72 to 77 of this 1991 Act.
42 (2) Any remaining revenues not expended during a biennium shall be transferred to the Oregon
43 State Productivity Improvement Revolving Fund established in ORS 182.375.
44 SECTION 79. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, after January 1, 1993, no
[30)
D-Eng. SB 66
1 state or public agency may purchase any office copier or facsimile paper product that is not
2 recyclable.
3 (2) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply if:
4 (a) There is no alternative paper product available;
5 (b) A specific type of paper product that is not recyclable is required to be used in office copier
6 or facsimile equipment purchased on or before the effective date of this 1991 Act; or
7 (c) It is not economically feasible for a state or public agency to purchase facsimile equipment
8 that uses recyclable paper.
9 (3) As used in this section, "recyclable" means the paper product is able to be collected for re-
10 cycling as high grade ledger paper.
11 SECTION 80. (1) In addition to any other requirement of law, any person or corporation re-
12 ceiving a credit against taxes otherwise due under ORS chapter 316, 317 or 318 for the use of re-
13 cycled or recyclable materials must show that the person receiving the credit gives preference to
14 Oregon producers of the recycled or recyclable materials used.
15 (2) This section applies to tax years beginning on and after January 1, 1992.
16 SECTION 81. On or before August 31, 1993, and every year thereafter, the department, in
17 consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, shall prepare a report to the Legisla-
18 tive Assembly describing the purchase and procurement of products purchased by state agencies
19 before and after January 1, 1992. The report shall detail, as much as possible, the amount of recycled
20 product used by state contractors before and after the effective date of this 1991 Act. The report
21 shall include but not be limited to the following:
22 (1) Listed by department, the total dollar amounts, volume and number of contracts of individual
23 products purchased by the department and any other state agency having delegated procurement
24 authority.
25 (2) Total dollar amounts, volume and number of contracts of each product purchased by the
26 state, including the Legislative Assembly and the State System of Higher Education.
27 (3) The total dollar amounts, volume and number of contracts of individual products, whether
28 recycled or nonrecycled, purchased by the state.
29 (4) The total dollar amounts, volume and number of contracts for recycled products, recycled
30 paper and compost products purchased, including whether the paper products commodity goals un-
31 der section 72 of this 1991 Act were achieved.
32 (5) The total dollar amount and volume of compost and cocompost products used by the state
33 under sections 21 to 25 of this 1991 Act or any other state program. As used in this subsection,
34 "cocompost" means a process that composts plant materials with organic sludges or a material re-
35 suiting from such a process.
36 (6) For recycled paper products purchased by state agencies, the total number of contracts,
37 dollar amounts and volume of those contracts that were eligible for the preference under section
38 72 of this 1991 Act.
39 (7) For each recycled product, including recycled paper and compost products, the total dollar
40 amounts, volume and number of contracts that were eligible for a preference or a combination
41 thereof under ORS 279.739.
42 (8) The range of dollar amounts for bids on procurement contracts including but not limited to
43 contracts for the procurement of individual recycled products.
44 (9) For each waste material, total revenue dollars and volume generated from the state recycling
(31]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 plan under section 75 of this 1991 Act.
2 (10) Recommendations to the Legislative Assembly as to revisions of the percentage amounts
3 contained in the secondary waste and post-consumer waste definitions for individual products that
4 will result in greater procurement of recycled products composed of recycled resources that would
5 otherwise be disposed of as solid waste in the state's disposal facilities.
6 (11) Recommendations on specific products available containing secondary post-consumer waste
7 that are procured by the state, used in the performance of a service or project for the state and used
8 in state construction contracts. These products shall be recommended as candidates for the appli-
9 cation of the recycled paper product preference described in section 72 of this 1991 Act.
10 (12) The Department of General Services, in consultation with the Department of Environmental
11 Quality, shall identify those products purchased in either large volumes or high dollar amounts by
12 the state which are available as a recycled product. The Department of General Services shall in-
13 elude this list in the Department of General Services' annual report and shall revise this list as
14 products purchased by the state become feasibly available in recycled form.
15 SECTION 82. (1) It is the intent of the Legislative Assembly that the state pursue all feasible
16 measures to improve markets for recycled products, including but not limited to procurement pref-
17 erences for purchases made by the state.
18 (2) Not later than March 1, 1992, the Economic Development Department in conjunction with
19 the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of General Services shall submit, on
20 behalf of the Oregon Market Development Council, a report to the Legislative Assembly concerning
21 the state's role in market development for recycling. The report. shall address the need for and ef-
22 fectiveness of procurement preferences for the state purchase of recycled goods and materials. The
23 report shall include but not be limited to an analysis of the role procurement preferences can play
24 in encouraging recycling and expanding the markets for recycled goods and materials.
25 SECTION 83. (1) The Department of Transportation shall conduct two paving projects using
26 rubberized paving. The rubberized paving projects shall use rubber-modified asphalt concrete, using
27 rubber from waste tires, including the use of the Oregon generic specifications developed for the
28 department.
29 (2) The Department of Transportation shall evaluate these projects and report the preliminary
30 findings to the Sixty-seventh Legislative Assembly. The evaluation shall include but need not be
31 limited to:
32 (a) The projects' costs; and
33 (b) Other standard highway evaluation tests.
34 (3) The Department of Transportation shall be responsible for the costs associated with imple-
35 menting the projects authorized under this section. If appropriate and if funds are available, the
36 Department of Environmental Quality may reimburse the Department of Transportation for project
37 costs incurred under this section.
38 SECTION 84. (1) During the period beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1995, the
39 Highway Division of the Department of Transportation shall conduct a research project to evaluate
40 recycled plastic products and composite materials containing recycled plastic in construction and
41 maintenance projects.
42 (2) The Highway Division shall report the preliminary findings to the Sixty-seventh Legislative
43 Assembly. The evaluation shall include but need not be limited to:
44 (a) Material costs;
[32]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (b) Durability of materials; and
r2 (c) Other standard evaluation test results.
3 (3) The Highway Division shall be responsible for the costs associated with implementing the
4 project authorized under this section. If appropriate and if funds are available, the Department of
5 Environmental Quality may reimburse the Highway Division for project costs incurred under this
6 section.
7 SECTION 85. (1) During the period beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1995, the State
8 Parks and Recreation Department shall conduct four demonstration projects using recycled plastic
9 and composite materials containing recycled plastic for structures and materials in the state parks.
10 (2) The State Parks and Recreation Department shall evaluate these projects and report the
11reliminary findings to the Sixty-seventh Legislative Assembly. The evaluation shall include but
P g
12 need not be limited to:
13 (a) Material costs;
14 (b) Durability of materials; and
15 (c) Other standard evaluation tests.
16 (3) The State Parks and Recreation Department shall be responsible for the costs associated
17 with implementing the projects authorized under this section. If appropriate and if funds are avail-
18 able, the Department of Environmental Quality may reimburse the State Parks and Recreation De-
19 part.ment for project costs incurred under this section.
20 SECTION 86. As used in sections 86 to 88 of this Act:
21 (1) "Label" means a code label, as described in section 87 of this Act, molded into or imprinted
r 22 on or near the bottom of the plastic container or bottle.
23 (2) "Rigid plastic bottle" means any rigid plastic container intended for single use with a neck
24 smaller than the container body that accepts a screw-type, snap cap or other closure and has a ca-
25 pacity of between at least 16 ounces and five gallons or less.
26 (3) "Rigid plastic container" means any formed or molded container other than.a bottle com-
27 prised predominantly of plastic resin and having a relatively inflexible finite shape or form and in-
28 tended primarily as a single service container with a capacity of between at least eight ounces and
29 five gallons or less.
30 SECTION 87. (1) All rigid plastic bottles and rigid plastic containers sold in Oregon shall be
31 labeled with a code that indicates the resin used to produce the rigid plastic bottle or rigid plastic
32 container. Rigid plastic bottles or rigid plastic containers with labels, basecups or other components
33 of a different material may be coded by their basic material if the material is compatible in recycling
34 systems. The code shall consist of a number placed inside a triangle and letters placed below the
35 triangle. The triangle shall be equilateral, formed by three arrows with the apex of each point of the
36 triangle at the midpoint of each arrow, rounded with a short radius. The pointer of each arrow shall
37 be at the midpoint of each side of the triangle with a short gap separating the pointer from the base
38 of the adjacent arrow. The triangle, formed by the three arrows curved at their midpoints, shall
39 depict a clockwise path around the code number. The numbers and letters used shall be as follows:
40 (a) 1 = PETE (polyethylene terephthalate);
41 (b) 2 = HDPE (high density polyethylene);
42 (c) 3 = V (vinyl);
I( 43 (d) 4 = LDPE (low density polyethylene);
44 (e) 5 = PP (polypropylene);
1331
D-Eng. SB 66
1 (f) 6 = PS (polystyrene); and
2 (g) 7 = OTHER. ((�.
3 (2) On and after January 1, 1992, the Department of Environmental Quality shall maintain a list
4 of abbreviations used on labels under subsection (1) of this section and shall provide a copy of that
5 list to any person upon request.
6 SECTION 88. No person shall manufacture for use in this state any rigid plastic container or
7 rigid plastic bottle that is not labeled in accordance with section 87 of this Act.
8 SECTION 89. ORS 182.375 is amended to read: {
9 182.375. (1) There is created in the State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund, I
10 an Oregon State Productivity Improvement Revolving Fund. All moneys in the Oregon State Pro-
11 ductivity Improvement Revolving Fund are appropriated continuously to the Executive Department
12 for making loans, grants, matching funds or cash awards available to state agencies or employees
13 for implementation of employee suggestions and productivity improvement projects upon authori-
14 nation of the Employe Suggestions Awards and Productivity Improvement Commission. Interest on t
15 earnings of the fund shall be credited to the fund. �I
i
16 (2) The Oregon State Productivity Improvement Revolving Fund shall consist of:
17 (a) Moneys transferred from the Executive Department's Personnel Account, as provided in ORS
18 240.170, in a sum not to exceed S500,000 to establish the fund.
19 (b) Executive Department savings realized from implementation of employee suggestions and
20 productivity improvement projects which may include existing and future projects such as travel
21 management services and recycling efforts.
22 (c) Any unexpended revenues transferred in accordance with section 78 (2) of this 1991
23 Act.
24 (3) Thirty percent of the agency or unit budget savings resulting from improved efficiency shall
25 be credited to the Oregon State Productivity Improvement Revolving Fund to be used for program
26 improvement by the agency or unit. If not used in the biennium in which the savings occur, the
27 amount of credit to an agency or unit may be treated as if it were continuously appropriated to the
28 agency or unit and may be expended in following biennia without resulting in any budget justifica-
29 tion for the agency or unit. Expenditures from the fund are not subject to allotment or other budg-
30 etary procedures.
31 (4) None of the expenditures in a biennium by the agency or unit under this section shall be
32 considered to be within any appropriation or expenditure limitation in the agency's base budget for
33 the biennium.
34 SECTION 90. ORS 459.995, as amended by section 14 of this Act, is further amended to read:
35 459.995. (1) In addition to any other penalty provided by law:
36 (a) Any person who violates ORS 459.165 to 459.200, 459.205, 459.270 or the provisions of ORS
37 459.180, 459.188, 459.190, 459.195, 459.710, [or] 459.715 or sections 86 to 88 of this 1991 Act or the
38 provisions of ORS 459.386 to 459.400 or any rule or order of the Environmental Quality Commission
39 pertaining to the disposal, collection, storage or reuse or recycling of solid wastes, as defined by
40 ORS 459.005, shall incur a civil penalty not to exceed $500 a day for each day of the violation.
41 (b) Any person who violates the provisions of ORS 459.420 to 459.426 shall incur a civil penalty
42 not to exceed $500 for each violation. Each battery that is disposed of improperly shall be a separate
43 violation. Each day an establishment fails to post the notice required under ORS 459.426 shall be a
44 separate violation.
[341
0 •
D-Eng. SB 66
/j 1 (c) For each day a city, county or metropolitan service district fails to provide the op-
2 portunity to recycle as required under ORS 459.165, the city, county or metropolitan service
3 district shall incur a civil penalty not to exceed $500 for.each violation.
4 (2) The civil penalty authorized by subsection (1) of this section shall be established, imposed,
5 collected and appealed in the same manner as civil penalties are established, imposed and collected
6 under ORS 448.305, 454.010 to 454.040, 454.205 to 454.255, 454.405, 454.425, 454.505 to 454.535, 454.605
7 to 454.745 and ORS chapter 468.
8 SECTION 91. If, after final appeal, the surcharge established by the Environmental Quality
9 Commission under ORS 459.297 is held to be valid and the state is able to collect the surcharge,
10 ORS 459.294, as amended by section 13 of this Act, is further amended to read:
11 459.294. (1) In addition to the permit fees provided in ORS 459.235, the commission shall est.ab- I
12 lish a schedule of fees for all disposal sites that receive domestic solid waste except transfer 1
13 stations. The schedule shall be based on the estimated tonnage or the actual tonnage, if known, re-
14 ceived at the site and any other similar or related factors the commission finds appropriate. The fees
15 collected pursuant to the schedule shall be sufficient to assist in the funding of programs to reduce
16 the amount of domestic solid waste generated in Oregon and to reduce environmental risks at do-
17 mest.ic waste disposal sites.
18 (2) For solid waste delivered to disposal facilities owned or operated by a metropolitan service
19 district, the schedule of fees, but not the permit fees provided in ORS 459.235, established by the
20 commission in subsection (1) of this section shall be levied on the district, not the disposal site.
21 (3) The commission also may require submittal of information related to volumes and sources
( 22 of waste or recycled material if necessary to carry out the activities in ORS 459.295.
\ 23 (4)(a) A local government that franchises or licenses a domestic solid waste site shall allow the
24 disposal site to pass through the amount of the fees established by the commission in subsection (1)
25 of this section to the users of the site.
26 (b) If a disposal site that receives domestic solid waste passes through all or a portion of the
27 fees established by the commission in subsection (1) of this section to a solid waste collector who
28 uses the site, a local government that franchises or licenses the collection of solid waste shall allow
29 the franchisee or licensee to include the amount of the fee in the solid waste collection service rate.
30 (5) The fees generated under subsection (1) of this section shall be sufficient to accomplish the
31 purposes set forth in ORS 459.295 but shall be no more than 50 cents per ton.
32 [(6) There shall be a fee on solid waste generated out of state. This fee shall be an amount equal
33 to the sum of the fees established under subsection (1) of this section and section 13a of this 1991 Act
34 and shall be collected in the same manner as fees established under subsection (1) of this section and
35 section 13a of this 1991 Act.)
36 SECTION 92. If, after final appeal, the surcharge established by the Environmental Quality
37 Commission under ORS 459.297 is held to be valid and the state is able to collect the surcharge, any
38 person subject to the surcharge shall pay the amount of the surcharge due for all solid waste gen-
39 erated out of state and accepted for disposal at the disposal site on and after January 1, 1991.
40 However, the person responsible for payment of the surcharge may deduct from the amount due any
41 fees paid under ORS 459.294 (6) as amended by section 13 of this Act on solid waste generated out
42 of state.
't 43 SECTION 93. The Department of Environmental Quality shall report biennially to the Legisla-
44 tive Assembly on the development and implementation of the opportunity to recycle in Oregon.
[35]
D-Eng. SB 66
1 SECTION 94. Notwithstanding any other law, the amount of $2,037,263 is established for the
2 biennium beginning July 1, 1991, as the maximum limit for payment of expenses from fees, moneys
3 or other revenues, including Miscellaneous Receipts, excluding federal funds, collected or received
4 by the Department of Environmental Quality for the purpose of carrying out the department's re-
5 sponsibilit.ies under this Act.
6 SECTION 95. Notwithstanding any other law, the amount of $80,000 is established for the
7 biennium beginning July 1, 1991, as the maximum limit for payment of expenses from fees, moneys
8 or other revenues, including Miscellaneous Receipts, excluding federal funds, collected or received
9 by the Department of General Services for the purpose of carrying out the department's responsi-
10 bilities under this Act.
11 SECTION 96. Notwithstanding any other law, the amount of $132,066 is established for the
12 biennium beginning July 1, 1991, as the maximum limit for payment of expenses from fees, moneys
13 or other revenues, including Miscellaneous Receipts, excluding federal funds, collected or received
14 by the State Forestry Department for the purpose of carrying out the department's responsibilities
15 under this Act.
16 SECTION 97. Notwithstanding any other law, the amount of $30,000 is established for the
17 biennium beginning July 1, 1991, as the maximum limit for payment of expenses from fees, moneys
18 or other revenues, including Miscellaneous Receipts, excluding federal funds, collected or received
19 by the State Parks and Recreation Department for the purpose of carrying out the department's
20 responsibilities under this Act.
21 SECTION 98. In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriations, there is appropriated
22 to the Department of Environmental Quality, for the biennium beginning July 1, 1991, out of the
23 General Fund, the sum of$143,750 for the purpose of carrying out this Act.
24 SECTION 99. Sections 86 to 88 of this Act and the amendments to ORS 459.995 by section 90
25 of this Act first become operative January 1, 1992.
26 SECTION 100. This Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace,
27 health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Act takes effect July 1, 1991.
28
[36)
MEMORANDUM 0
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Solid Waste Advisory Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin
9-D--
DATE: July 9, 1991
SUBJECT: Financial Review of Haulers
The City will be authorizing Dennis Powell (CPA) with Coopers &
Lybrand to conduct the financial review of the haulers which the
Council authorized on June 18th. The scope of review is the same
that the Committee reviewed at its last meeting.
Dennis has worked with numerous other jurisdictions to conduct
studies and audits of many solid waste franchisees. He has also
worked with all three of our haulers through a recent study
conducted for Washington County.
The study is scheduled for completion no later than September 30th.
I anticipate having this as a discussion item at the October 21st
SWAC meeting.
The haulers will receive formal notice of the appointment of the
review consultant as soon as the paperwork is formalized with
Coopers & Lybrand.
le
i
CITY OF TIGARD
June 25, 1991 OREGON
Alice Fuj iwara
14630 SW 89th St.
Tigard, Oregon 97224
RE: Tigard Municipal Code #11.04 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Dear Ms. Fujiwara,
It has come to my attention that your trash is being deposited
illegally. Section 11.04.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code states:
No person shall, without authorization and in compliance with
the disposal site requirements of this chapter, deposit waste
on public/private property of another without their
permission. Streets/public places are not authorized as areas
to deposit waste except as specific provisions for containers
have been made.
Evidence attained at a trash receptacle located by Washington
Mutual Bank, included many items which where traced to you and this
address. Any future incidence of illegal dumping may initiate the
issuance of a citation, court date, and possible fine of up to $500
per violation, an UNCLASSIFIED MISDEMEANOR. Your cooperation in
abiding by this City Ordinance will preclude any legal action taken
against you by the City of Tigard.
If you have any question regarding the Tigard Municipal Code, or
this situation in particular please do not hesitate to call. My
phone number is 639-4171.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Don Bohn
Code Enforcement Officer
13125 SW Hail Blvd,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171
NEWSWATCH
tysays Bruce Rosetto,president. future yard-debris collection degradable plastic bags;20biode- tion rates,compatibilitywithex-
Plans call for the MRF to mech programs. gradable brown paper bags;four isting equipment, contamination
anically sort approximately 80 pe The pilot includes six residential sheets of biodegradable twine problems and relative costsforuse
cent of the glass,aluminum,steel collection routes in the county with mesh sheeting;or 20 conventional and distribution.Metro expects to
high-density polyethylene, poly a minimum of 250 households In single use plastic bags release the results of the study
ethylene terephthalate,polyviny the test,each household receives The study asks residents,haul- after October this year.
chloride,cardboard,newsprint,of either:two conventional 32-gallon ers,processors and local govern- If Metro finds sufficient de
fice paper, computer paper and cans marked"Yard Debris Only;" ments to evaluate the effectiveness mandfor compost productsit
kraft bags coming to the center. one conventional 90-gallon roller of each type of container on the plans to begin curbside collec-
Rosetto expect the materials sent cart;20 clear biodegradablelphoto- basis of such things as participa- tion in 1994. ■
to the 45,000 square foot facility to
come primarily from commercial
operations ■ UMC CUPS
R NTJUN S COUNTY TRIES Hmy,
� Bay Knew You, •
CONTAINER EXPERIMENT
Clackamas County,Ore.,wants he editors of Organic Gardening,published by Rodale Press,Emmaus,Pa.,get
tofindoutwhichrecyclingcon- a their share of strange mail from their readers.So,when the package of what
tainers work best for collecting appeared to be wood ashes showed up at the office,Bob Teufel,president of Rodale,
yard debris The county,in conjunc- sifted through the material and commented that it might make an OK soil condi-
tion with Portland's Metropolitan tioner.Then he read:the accompanying letter. "All during his lifetime,my deceased '
Service District,began an eight- husbandHarry spent most of our spare money on magazines and books about organic
month,$60,000 pilot project to test gardening. I am passing along my best wishes and Harry,as his final request was
the effectiveness of various kinds that his ashes be scattered on the Organic Gardening experimental farm;'it read.
of containers Metro and Clackamas Teufel didn't have the contents analyzed,but they didn't hurt the garden any.
plan to use the results to design
SPRINGFIELD RECYCLING FACILITY (MA)
ALSO USES A
BOLLEGRAAF BALER + SORTING SYSTEM
HBC-100 and Sorting System at
Springfield Recycling t%acility
t t (operated by Resource Recovery
r Systems,Inc.)in Springfield,MA.
- " PRODUCTION PROGRAM:
r Ax • Balers
• Sorting Systems
• Conveyors
• Shredders
( Confidential Shredders
• Reel Cutters
- For more information, contact:
HIGHLIGHTS: B>•
I. PRE-PRESS FLAP SYSTEM, which implies a fully automatic machine(no operator) with VAN DYK
less energy costs,a high production(a bale every 1.5 minutes)and no wear and tear BALER CORP.
because of the absence of the cutting principle. VAN DYK BALER CORP.
2.RELIABILITY, built up during 30 years experience in the recycling business. Over a 1033 ROUTE 46
thousand balers and a hundred sorting systems in operation world wide. CLIFTON, NJ 07013
3. ALL PAPER GRADES as well as plastics, rags and cans can be processed by the TEL (201) 773-4844
Bollegraaf systems. FAX (201) 773-5141
4. BOLLEGRAAF SORTING SYSTEMS are all custom designed to suit the customers needs.
reader service 66
20/May 1991/RECYCLING TODAY