Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-02-06; City Council; 10482; Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. . 0 w ~ a: a.. ~ z 0 ti ,ca: .... 6 z = 8 Cl~OF CARLSBAD -AGENDt'~ILL ,-.--------,.--- MTO. 2/6/90 DEPT. U/M IIIJ.E; ANALYSIS OF AB 939; TnE I!ITEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT OP 1989 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Approve staff recommended policy positions concerning implementation of AB 939, as identified in Exhibit 2 and direct staff to convey the City Council's position to the appropriate state or local agencies. 2. Direct staff to prepare a work program for the implementation of AB 939 for City council consideration. ITEM EXPLANATION: The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, AB 939, makes major changes in the way that solid waste will be managed at the state and local level. It was passed in the last days cf the legislative session. The implementation of AB 939 will require more City involvement in the responsibility for dealing with the millions of tons of trash generated annually in this State. It should be noted, however, that its last minute passage resulted in several omissions, an absence of clarity on some issues and vague guidelines for implementation. These issues raise several serious concerns for those who will be managing the integrated solid waste programs. The Act repeals the legislative basis for the California Waste Management Board, t:le existing County Solid Waste Management Plans and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations which have guided the Cities and Counties in their roles as the Local Enforcement Agencies for regulation of existing solid waste facilities. The Act establishes, at the State level, an Integrated Waste Management Board (IWMB) which has yet to be appointed. In the interim, the existing California Waste Management Board is functioning as the Integrated waste Management Board, and is preparing to adopt the interim emergency regulations. The Board, which will establish regulations and policy affecting all local agencies, has no mandated representative from either cities or counties. The Board is funded through a 1.andf ill surcharge of $. 50 per ton effective January 1, 1990, increasing to a maximum of $1. 00 per ton after January 1, 1991. (Preparation and implementation of local plans may be funded by locally assessed solid waste fees.) Major changes affecting Carlsbad, other cities and the County include: By March 1, 1990, the cites and the county must convene a Task Force to coordinate local efforts; .... ,-, PAGE 2 OF AB 1, /tl, 7',.f,,i._, ,. The City must submit a source reduction and recycling plan element that will become part of the county wide Integrate~ Waste Management plan. See Exhibit 3 for a detailed explanation; Mandatory recycling goals of 25% by 1995 and 50% by 2000 for cities and the County; Operators of landfills (the county and City of San Diego) must submit landfill closure and post-closure plans directly to the IWMB. A more detailed summary of AB 939 is contained in Exhibit l. The new responsibilities imposed by AB 939 will require the city Council to adopt seve· l policies that will i:>rovide guidance to staff in the implementation of the Act. These iss\!es are: 1. Composition of the county-wide Task force. 2. Status of the existing County Solid Waste Management Plans. 3. Funding and staffing to implement the provisions of AB 939. 4. AB 939 interpretation and clean up legislation. The above issues are discussed in more detail in Exhibit 2. FISCAL ~MPACT STATEMENT: This additional work has not been previously funded. Funds could be made available from the General Fund or generated through fees authorized by AB 939. Should the City Council approve staff's recommendation funding sources will be recommended in the work program. EXHIBITS: 1. Summary of AB 939 2. Issues related to implementation of AB 939. 3 . City eJ.ement requirements 4. List of related solid waste legislation .:. Exhibit 1 INTEGRATED WAST~ MANAGEMENT ACT SUMMARY* 1. The Act replaces the current part-time California Waste Management Board ( CWMB) with a six-member, full-time California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) consisting of: • one member, appointed by the Governor, with private- sector, solid waste industry experience; • one member., appointed by the Governor, who has been ctn official of a nonprofit organization promoting recycling and environmental protection; • two members appointed by the Governor who represent the public; • two other members representing the public --one each appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and by the Speaker of the Assembly. AB 939 also institutes strict conflict-of-interest restrictions governing Board members' income sources, Board actions, and ex- parte communications. 2. The Act requires that each county establish a task force to coordinate city source reduction and recycling activities for inclusion in countrywide integrated waste management plans. 3. By Januacy 1, 1991, each county must prepare a source reduction and recycling element for its unincorporated areas. By July 1, 1991, each city must prepare, adopt, and submit to the county a source reduction and recycling element. The elements must include the following components: • • • • • • a waste characterization study; a source reduction component; a recycling component; a composting component; a solid waste capacity component; a public information component; a funding component; a special ~aste component; and, a household hazardous waste component Exhibit 1 ZN'l'EGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT SUMMARY 4. Each county must prepare a countywide siting element specifying areas for disposal or transformation sites needed for the ensuing 15 years, to provide for residual wastes which cannot be diverted through source reduction, recycling, and composting. 5. Each county must prepare, adopt and submit to the state Board an integrated waste management plan which includes the city and county elements for source reduction and recycling and the countywide siting element. 6. The Act establishes a statewide hierarchy for integrated waste management, using the priorities of (1) source reduction, (2) recycling and composting, and (3) environmentally safe land disposal and transformation ( at the discretion of local governments). Cities and countries are required to divert 25 percent of solid waste from landfills through source reduction, recycling and composting by January 1, J.995. By January 1, 2000, a 50 percent diversion is mandated. Alternative goals may be allowed by the Board where the 50 percent goal is proven not to be feasible. 7. The Board must approve or disapprove a plan within 120 days of receipt. If a plan is disapproved, the local jurisdiction must make corrections within 120 days. The Board may impose administrative civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day for failure to submit an adequate plan. a. The preparation and implementation of local plans are to be funded by fees imposed by local jurisdictions on generators of solid waste. 9. The Board must adopt minimum statewide standards for solid waste handling and disposal. 10. The existing comprehensive system of permits, inspection and site cleanup and maintenance for all solid waste facilities in the state is strengthened through increase Board regulation and guidance. Exhibit 1 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT SUMMARY 11. Funding for programs of the new Board (including those in SB 1322) will be accomplished through a landfill surcharge set at 50 cents per ton beginning January 1, 1990, and increasing to a maximum of $1 per ton after January 1, 1991. * SOURCE: CALI~ORNIA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD -- IMPORTANT DATES JAN. l, 1990 -STATE BOARD TO PREPARE AND ADOPT EMERGENCY REGULATIONS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT TELL CITIES AND COUNTIES HOW TO ACHIEVE DIVERSION -STATE BOARD TO BEGIN FEE ASSESSMENTS@ $0.50 PER TON. MAR. 1, 1990 -COUNTY AND CITIES MUST DEVELOP A TASK FORCE TO COORDINATE AND DEVELOP Integrated Waste Management plans, including a county wide siting element. A Task force is to be reconvened every 5 years. JAN. 1, 1991 -COUNTY MUST PREPARE AND ADOPT A SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT FOR UNINCORPORATED AREAS. Board makes determination 120 days after receipt.* BOARD TO SUBMIT TO THE GOVERNOR A REPORT AND MODEL LEGISLATION TO IMPLEMENT A DISPOSAL COST FEE ON PRODUCTS -STATE WATER BOARD TO SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE CONCERNING HAZARDOUS WASTE/ SOLID WASTE SITING AND WATER QUALITY PROTECTION JUL l, 1991 -CITIES MUST PREPARE AND ADOPT A SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT, AND SUBMIT IT TO THE COUNTY. Board makes determination 120 days after receipt.* AUG. 1, 1991 -BOARD TO PREPARE AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION REGULATIONS FOR LEA'S AUG. 1, 1992 -LEA CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET JAN. 1, 1994 -SUBMISSION OF ALL CITY AU'D UNINCORPORATED AREA ELEMENTS, INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS, AND THE TASK FORCE SUMMARY TO THE STATE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD BY COUNTIES WITH MORE THAN 8 YRS. CAPACITY* JAN. 1, 1995 -PLAN ELEMENTS MAY NOT INCLUDE MORE THAN 10% OF REDUCTION BY TRANSFORMATION. -25% DIVERSION FROM LANDFILL AND TRANSFORMATION BY SOURCE REDUCTION, RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING -ALTERNATES TO THE 50% REQUIREMENT MAY BE REQUESTED JAN. 1, 2000 -50% DIVERSION FROM LAND FILL AND TRANSFORMATION BY SOURCE REDUCTION, RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING IS REQUIRED. Exhibit 2 INTEGM.TED WASTE MANA<;':EMENT ACT ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION OF AB 939 1. The county must convene a Task Force to be approved by the cities and the County by March 1, 1990. Composition, staffing and funding for this effort must be identified and approved. 2. The County has requested reinstatement of the county Solid Waste Management Plan (CoSWMP) to provide policy guidance until the new Integrated Waste Management Plans are adopted in 1994. 3. Funding and staffing for planning and implementing the Act must be identified and approved. 4. Clean-up legislation is inconsistencies, omissions, provisions in the Act. necessary to address and to clarify certain ISSUES 1. composition of the county-wide Task Force The cities and the County are required to convene a Task Force by March 1, 1990 to af'lsist in coordinating the development of the IWM Plan. The Task Force will: identify solid waste management issues of countywide or regional concern; determine the need for solid waste collection system, processing facilities and marketing arrangements for recycled materials; and ensure that each jurisdiction's plans are consistent. The Task Force composition must be approved by a majority of the cities within the county with a majority of the population and the County. Options for composition of the Task Force include: county staff proposal. county staff has proposed a Task Force consisting of two members of the Board of Supervisors, two members of the San Diego City Council, three members from the remaining cities selected by the City Selection Committee, and a representative from San Diego's military community. The Board would appoint two Board members to serve on that Task Force; designate one Board member to serve as Chair of the Task Force and convene it as mandated by the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. 1 . .. A separate technical advisory committee consisting of city Managers or their designees, would be formed. Approval of this option would not provide adequate representation and participation for cities as contemplated by AB 939. Joint Powers Agency (JPA) This option would provide an opportunity for all cities and the County to cooperatively move forward with the implementation of AB 939. Solid waste management in the region is properly the responsibility of all cities and the county. Moreover, a JPA could provide the means for policy development and financing of a regionwide integrated waste management planning and implementation program. A Technical Advisory Committee consisting of city Manager's or designees should be formed to assure the effective participation of cities, as contemplated by AB 939. Alternative to JPA Should a JPA not be formed, all eighteen cities in the county should be represented on the Task Force. To do otherwise would not comply with the spirit or intent of AB 939 participation objectives. Further, Task Force credibility would be suspect, if not irreparably damaged. A Technical Advisory committee, as described above, should also be formed. Recommendation: It is staffs recommendation that the Council support formation of a Joint Powers Agency with all cities and the County to perform the functions of the AB 939 Task Force. Shoulc:J. a JPA not be formed the Task Force should consist of all eighteen cities in addition to the County of San Diego. A Technical Advisory Committee, consisting of City Managers or de~ignees, should be formed to ensure effective participation. 2 Exhibit 2 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION FOR AB ~39 2. Status of county Solid Waste Management Plans Upon the effective date of AB 939 (1/1/90) the County Solid Waste management Plans {CoSWMPS) were repealed. The new San Diego Integrated waste Management Plan required by AB 939 is not required to be submitted to the state until 1994. The county has proposed that the old CoSWMPs be reinstated and used as a guide for countywide solid waste efforts in the interim. state legislation will be required to accomplish the County's objective. Should the CoSWMP be reinstated as an interim plan the County would be able to continue to pursue the San Marcos Trash to Energy Plant as a planned facility. Thus, while the concept of an interim plan is useful, unrestricted reinstatement of the CoSWMP would not be in Carlsbad's best interest. Although it is the intent of AB 939 to require local agencies to adopt Integrated Waste Management Plans which would rely on the use of all solid waste management technology, source 2:~duction and recycling are given the highest priority. Transformation (Trash to Energy) and landfills have the lower priority. Since transformation facilities and landfills are of the lowest priority, reinstating a CoSWMP which gives priority to landfills and a trash to energy plant would not be in conformance with the intent of AB 939. Recommen4ation: It is staff's recommendation that the city council oppose reinstatement of the County Solid Waste Management Plan as an interim planning document. It is also recommended that the city council support legislation or regulations that would permit solid waste facility siting to be approved by the AB 939 Task Force. 3 Exhibit 2 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT ISSUIS RELATED TO IKPLBMBN'?ATION FOR AB 939 3. l'Unding an4 staffing the Implementation ot AB 939 By July 1, 1991 the City of Carlsbad must prepare and adopt a source reduction and recycling element which includes: l. Waste characterization components 2. Source reduction components 3. Recycling components 4. Composting components 5. Solid waste facility capacity components 6. Education and public education components 7. Funding components 8. Special waste components 9, Household waste components Each element must contain an implementation schedule which indicates how the City will attain the 25% and 50% diversion goals by January l, 1995 and January 1, 2000,1 respectively. In addition to the above work effort, City staff will be required to intensify it's effort in the oversight of solid waste collection disposal and recycling efforts within the City. The City's responsibilities under AB 939 could be achieved by contracting with consultants, performing the work with City staff, performing the work cooperatively with other local agencies in the County or any combination of the above. Further evaluation of AB 939 and it's requirements will be required before staff can determine what portion of the AB 939 implementation work could be most appropriately accomplished cooperatively with adjoining agencies and which of the work would be appropriate for accomplishment by contract or city staff. Recommendation: It is staff's recommendation that the City council direct staff to prepare a work program for the implementation of AB 939 for Council consideration. such work programs should include an estimate of the time and cost required to implement the City's source reduction and recycling element. 4 Exhibit 2 INTBGQ'l'!P WASTE MANAGEMBNT ACT D,suzs PLMIP TO IMPL!KJNTATIQH lOR U 939 4. Cleanup legislation and eme~gency regulations A. Lack of local government representation on the new IWM Board, Comment: There is not a board member who would assure local government concerns are represented at the state level. Position: Change one board position or add one position to be a representative of City governments. B. The County of San Diego believes there are conflicts between ■Ubmittal dates for city and county elements of the IWK Plan, Comment: The County element is to be prepared by January 1, 1991. The City element is to be prepared by July 1, 1991. Both are to be added to the Integrated Waste Management Plan that is to be submitted to the state by January l, 1994. Position: No changes are required the time schedules appear to be appropriate. c. The county of San Diego would like the state to designate responsibility for implementation of the IWK Plan to the counti•• in line with their historic role in solid waste management, Comment: The cities are responsible for the diversion of wastes within their jurisdiction. The county is responsible for unincorporated area diversion. Through the AB 939 Task Force regional issues are the responsibility of all. Planning and implementation of AB 939 can best be cooperatively managed by formation of a Joint Powers Agency for planning and implementation. 5 - Exhibit 2 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT ISSUES RRLATED TO IMPLEMENTATION FOR AB 939 Position: Responsibility and authority should be equally shared. The Task Force responsibilities should be accomplished through formation of a Joint Powers Agency. D. The county of San Diego desires to amend the definition o'f 11 processing11 to include the word 11 transformation11 , Comment: AB 939 specifically states that transformation and disposal are the least desirable methods of solid waste disposal. Including transformation under the processing definition would have the effect of designating transformation facilities as recycling enterprises. Position: Do not support any changes that would help redefine the laws to encourage or allow transformation to become part of the definition of recycling. E. The county of San Diego desires to redefine "composting" to delete the source separation requirement for municipal solid waste, Comment: Organic material can be separated at the source or at a solid waste facility. The AB 939 definition would provide for separation at the source only and is too restrictive. Position: support the County's effort to amend the definition of composting. F. The county of San Diego desires to redefine the term hazardous waste to be a reference to Title 22, Chapter 6.5, section 25117 of the Health, Safety Code, stating that if the definition is adopted by reference, the potential for two conflicting definitions at some time in the future is avoided. 6 Exhibit 2 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION FOR AB 939 Comment: A logical technical correction Position: Support G. The county desires to reinstate the role of the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) in the closure/post closure permit p~ocess, 'Which was inadvertently dropped from AB 939 during last minute revisions. Comment: The roles and training and certification requirements for LEA's are unclear at this time. Position: Support the County's position. Support amendments which would clarify the role of LEA's. H. Scope of the required waste characterization plans (by city, lan~fill or region. Comment: If waste characterization studies are done by region there will be less accuracy. Characterization of waste by City will be costly and time consuming. Waste characterization analysis by landfill would seem to be the most efficient and effective means to determine the composition of municipal solid waste. Further, since it is unlikely that the composition of a waste stream would substantially change over a short period,local agencies that have recently performed waste characterization studies should not be required to repeat the studies for AB 939. Position: Suppo~t waste characterization studies by landfill. I. Proposed grandfathering of transformation and landfill projects already in the permit process. Comment: In conj unction with the efforts to reinstate the CoSWMP, is a proposal to grant planning approval to landfill and transformation facilities already in the permitting process. 7 Exhibit 2 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT ISSUES RELATED TO IMFLEMENTATION FOR AB 939 Grandfathering such projects would exempt the San Marcos trash to energy project from the provisions and priorities of AB 939 and bypass AB 939 Task Force scrutiny. Position: It is staff's recommendation that the city Council oppose legislation or regulations which would serve to grandfather the San Ma:ccos trash to energy plant. Recommendation: Direct staff to convey the above recommended positions to the appropriate state or local agencies. 8 Eshibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT Requirements for the CITY OF CARLSBl\D ELEMENT This element will become a part of the regional Integrated Waste Management Plan and shall include, but is not limited to: * WASTE CHARACTERIZATION COMPONENT * SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT * RECYCLING COMPONENT * COMPOSTING COMPONENT * SW FACILITY CAPACITY COMPONENT * EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT * FUNDING COMPONENT * SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT * HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPONENT - Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT CITY OF CARLSBAD WASTE CHARACTERIZATION <!OMPONENT The city is required to show: MATERIALS IN SOLID WASTE AFFECTED BY THE SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENTS STATISTICAL REPRESENTATION OF SOLID WASTE INCLUDING SEASONAL VARIATIONS MATERIALS IDENTIFIED BY: VOLUME OR WEIGHT MATERIAL TYPE SOURCE OF GENERATION RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL GOVERNMENTAL OTHER The requirements of this component are to be reexamined and clarified by the IWMB. Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT CITY OP CARLSBAD ELEMENT JOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT PURPOSE: ENCOURAGE REDUCTION USE OF NON RECYCLABLES ENCOURAGE REPLACING DISPOSABLES WITH REUSABLES ENCOURAGE REDUCTION YARD WASTE GENERATED USE OF GARBAGE RATES THAT ENCOURAGE REDUCTION ENCOURAGE EFFICIENCY IN MANUFACTURING ENCOURAGE COMPOSTING (BUT NOT INCINERATION) PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE TYPES OF MATERIALS METHODS FACILITIES TRASH RATES AND ECONOMIC INCENTIVES source reduction does not include: show reduction that is in addition to recycling and composting list materials affected by city source reduction efforts. show methods the city will use to determine quantity and type of materials to be diverted. determine what expansion of existing facilities and new facilities will be required. show how the city will help to reduce user generation and the use of disposables, and packaging, and increase efficiency in the use of goods. steps taken after the material becomes solid waste. Actions that would negatively impact air or water quality. """"' Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTE HMfAGEMENT ACT CITY OP CARLSBAD ILEMBNT RECYCLING COMPONENT PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE TYPES OF MATERIALS METHODS FACILITIES MARKETS SERVICE AREAS Recycling does not include: sh~w reduction that is in addition to source reduction and composting list materials affected by city recycling efforts. show methods the city will use to determine quantity and type of materials to be diverted. determine what expansion of existing facilities and new facilities will be required. market development, procurement and price preference industrial, contmercial, residential, governmental, and other curbside and buyback programs manual and automated material recovery facilities, zoning and building code changes rate structures that encourage recycling Steps taken after the material becomes solid waste. Actions that would negatively impact air or water quality. I Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED Wi.\STE MANAGEMENT ACT CI'l'Y OP CARLSBAD BLEMEN'l' COMPOSTING COMPONENT PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE TYPES OF MATERIALS METHODS FJ..CILITIES MARKETS show reduction that is in addition to source reduction and recycling list materials affected by city composting efforts. show methods the city will use to determine quantity and type of materials to be diverted. determine what expansion of existing facilities and new facilities will be required. market development, procurement and price preference This component may be amended to show the effect of Assembly Bill 2295. Compooting does not include: Steps taken after the material becomes solid waste. Actions that would negatively impact air or water quality. Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT CITY or CARLSBAD BLEMEN'l' EDUCATION ANP PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT The City must show how we will increase public awareness of and participation in recycling, source reduction and composting programs. FUNDING COMPONENT The funding component shall identify and specifically describe projected costs, revenues and revenue sources to implement all components of the entire element. SPECIAL WASTES COMPONENT Identification of existing and proposed special waste handling and disposal programs for asbestos, sewage sludge arid other special wastes that are not hazardous wastes. Exhibit 3 INTEGRATED WASTB MANAGEMENT ACT CITY or CARLSBAD ELEMENT UCILITY CAPACITY CQMPQNBN'l' Projection of facilities needed for the next 15 years, reduced by: source reduction recycling composting other diversion programs processing, destruction, and transformation facility capacity disposal or transformation capacity with others l i ' .. Exhibit 3 INTBGRM'BD WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT QtTY QI CARLSBAD ILIMINT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTES COKPQUliT. PROGRAM ~,ND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULT.i TYPUS OF MATERI~IS - ME':i:.flODS FACILITIES MARKETS for collection, treatment, and disposal of residential household waRte af f ecte.d by household hazardous waste programs to determine quality and type of materials to be diverted determine what expansion of existing facilities and new facilities will be required. market development, procurement and price preference This component may be amended to include provisions in Assembly Bill ~88 and AB 1196. Exhibit 4 INTBGRA'l'ED WASTB MANAGEMENT ACT SOLID WASTE LEGISLATION AB 4 Ch. 1094 once recycled product procurement programs AB 888 AB 939 AB 1010 AB 1041 AB 1092 AB 1101 AB 1196 AB 1305 AB 1306 AB 1307 (Eastin). Requires preference for recycled and composted good procurement by the state. Ch. 809 Household hazardous waste collection (La Follette). Requires a Household Hazardous Waste Plan (HHWP) be submitted. several permit requirements are discussed. Ch. 1095 Creates California Integrated Waste Manage~ent Board for planning and implementation l(jcal and regional programs (Sher). (Detailed explanation in attachment B). Ch. 72 Ch. 498 Ch. 736 Ch. 541 Ch. 908 Non-hazardous wood in the definition of solid waste (Eastin). Facilities that receive only timber or wood are not landfills. Waste board report on plastics recycling (La Follette). Submitted to board January l, 1991 on use, disposal and recyclability. Solid waste landf'ill facilities in Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin (Tanner). Local notice of residential garbage service cost (La Follette). Agencies not charging customers 90% or more of Solid Waste disposal costs must report all costs to residents. Local assistance grants to prevent disposal of hazardous waste in landfills (Tanner). The state may provide grants after January 1, 1990. Ch. 1093 Recycled newsprint (Kill~~). consumers of newsprint will be required to publish/print on recycled newsprint. Ch. 1092 Recycl,ed paving materials (Killea). Use of recycled materials by the state and for state contracts. Ch. 285 Industrial development bonds (Killea). Bond program will include manufacturers of recycled and reused products. AB 1308 AB 1408 AB 1427 AB 1570 AB 1843 AB 2295 SB 228 SB 432 SB 1322 Exhibit 4 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT SOLID WASTE LEGISLATION Ch. 1091 Recycling equipment investment tax (Yillea). Personal tax credits manufacturers of recycled goods. credit for Ch. 1260 Solid waste permit fee limitations (Tanner). Ch. 527 Ch. 1226 Allowed charges change to cost to provide services. Financial responsibility evidence by landfill owners (Wright). For closure and post closure maintenance. Recycled (Sher). oil information and procurement For state and local purchase of oil. Ch. 974 Scrap tire regulation and recycling (W. Brown) . Ch. 1247 Sludge as fertilizex (Cortese). Regulation changes to encourage recycling of municipal sewage sludge. Ch. 654 Limitations (Garamendi). on closure/post closure State fiscal procedures. fund Ch. 1090 Recycling equip. investment tax credit for individuals (Alquist). Similar to AB 1308 for manufacturers. Ch. 1096 State integrated waste management programs (Bergeson). Becomes part of AB 939. Discusses State Program.