The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-03-01; City Council; 12609; Solid waste management updateL -rl .o 4-l U ; 24 cd 0 0 u a cd FI u &I 0 a a, &I 5 a a, ? ?I a, $4 rl -rl u 0 u u a g z 2 5 4 4 G z 3 0 0 ,I - YOJY OF CARLSBAD - AGWDA BILL SOLID WASTE i Dl AB # wc TITLE: MTG. m MANAGEMENT UP DATE CI DEPT. CM CI RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review existing Solid Waste Management Policy and give City representatives direct appropriate. ITEM EXPLANATION The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the Council an opportunity to rev your meeting, staff will present some possible areas for revision to the policy, anc Council desires any amendments staff will return at a subsequent meeting with a re-’ policy for Council consideration. exidha Solid Waste Management Policy, A copy of the poby is attached as Exhit: The Interim Solid Waste Commission continues to work on a very aggressive timei order to develop a recommended governance by the May 31, 1994 deadline. Aitac Exhibit 2 is a tentative schedule to reach thaU objective. In order to accomplish all tt that needs to be done the Interim Commission has developed a number committees. Attached as Exhibit 3 is a list of the existing sub-committees. Mayc or Councilmember Nygaard represent the City at the Commission Meetings or on 1 committees. In addition to an update on Interim Solid Waste Commission activities, staff will prE update on activities of the North County Solid Waste Management Agency (JPA) F meeting on February 17,1994, the JPA adopted a recommendation to further disc define a proposal from Coast Waste ManagemenVECDC and return to the JPA at il 3, 1994 meeting with a recommendation concerning the proposal. A copy of proposal and staff analysis is attached as Exhibit 4. City staff will presen information and a recommended position on this issue at your Council meeting. EXHIBITS 1. 2. 3. 4. City of Carlsbad Solid Waste Management Policy. Tentative schedule of activity for Interim Solid Waste Commissior Interim Solid Waste Commission Ad Hoc Subcommittee Listings Staff report to Board Members - North County Solid Waste Mar Agency dated February 7, 1994 I ,I -1 lr . I \ - . - - . - - __.. ..- -,.. .. c;n' C,F C.i;iLSZ.a Poiicq Xo. UT) COL"1L POLICY STATEllEST Date Issued Yarcn Cancellation Date- Supersedes No. 2 v Effective Date a Gene x1 S u bjecl: S 0 LID W h S T E 31 AN X G EM E N T Specific Subject: Copies to: city Council, city hlanager, city Attorney, Department and 1 Emp!oyee BuIletin Boards, Press, File BACKGROUND: The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 adoF AB 939 (the "Act"), requires Carlsbad and the other cities Diego County to assume major new responsibilities for solid Under the 'IAct", cities and the County are required to deve: approve their own "solid Waste plans", known as Source Rec and Recycling Elements. All cities and the County are requ cooperate in finding mutually acceptable, environmentally s financially feasible programs and facilities to meet thc waste disposal needs of the region. Landfill capacity in San Diego County has been depleted. C has supported expansion of the San Marcos landfill and aq consider accepting a transfer station. The City a! supported the County's efforts to site new landfills committed to citywide recycling. However, Carlsbad, Esc Oceanside and Encinitas have opposed incineration of soli on environmental, land use compatibility and economic 5 The City is responsible for managing solid waste within C and for participation in mutually acceptable regional so: The City Council has therefore, determined to state its po solid waste management. PURPOSE: This Policy is intended to implement the nAct'f and guidance for the City's involvement in regional sol: management issues. The Policy will provide guidance to developing the City's source reduction, recycling ele direction for the programs of source reduction, recyc recovery necessary to meet the 25 percent and 50 percent c requirements of the Act. Achievement of these diversi requires important changes in the ways that residents, bu: institutions, haulers and the City itself create, handle and dispose of solid waste. The City will actively prom changes with cost effective and environmentally safe pr -- i I C?~K OF c4ARLs"D;;3 Policy No. 46 (E Date Issued2 Effective Date- Canceilation Da C 0 L3-C IL P 0 LI CY STATEhIEhT Gene ra1 s ubj e ct: S 0 L I D W X S T E MAN A G E A1 EN T Supersedes No. Specific Subject: Copies to: city Council, city Manager, City Attorney, Department a] Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File This Policy also expresses the City's preference for a solid waste management system, controlled by responsib agencies. POLICY: 1. Intecrrateci Waste Manaqement: A. Source reduction, recycling, reuse and compostir most appropriate strategies to accomplish reductii amount of solid waste to be disposed of in enviro safe sanitary landfills. This 'hierarchy of strate5 accordance with the requirements of the "Act1*. B. A publicly controlled solid waste managemen - which protects the environment and the rate I preferred. However, if a publicly controlled syst meet the needs of the City, private sector alternat be considered. C. A regional joint powers agency (JPA) should be cooperatively implement the Integrated Waste Managc created under the llActll. The JPA should have the conduct source reduction activities and site, develop, permit and operate solid waste facilities for in the Integrated Waste Management Plan for it is believed that a JPA can be effective with les percent membership. D. Ownership and control of the waste strear retained so that Carlsbad's waste can be directed most cost effective and environmentally safe sc management strategies. All contracts for refuse in the City will provide that the City retains ow refuse set out for collection. County. All agencies are invited to join the JPA i I 0 e CITY OF C.ARLS3AE Policy No. G6 (pa% Effective Date Mari Cancellation Date- Supersedes No. N/ COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Date Issued March General Subject: S 0 L ID W X S T E 3IX N A G EITE N T Specific Subject: Copies to: city Council, city hfanager, city Attorney, Department and I Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File 2. Environmental Protection and Resource Conservation: Disposal of refuse in properly constructed landfi acceptable, while incineration of refuse is unaccer Adequate landfill sites are available. The factor cause other agencies to accept incineration of (landfill unavailability and ground water pollutio landfill leachate), do not exist in this region. Mol incineration does not appear to be a cost effective SI compared to comprehensive materials recovery facilit landfills. Maximum Source Reduction and Materials Recoverv: - Waste reduction programs and materials reuse, recycl composting programs must be used to the fullest feasible. promptly implemented. 3; A region-wide source reduction program sh 4. Recvclinq: A. City wide collection of recyclables from res businesses will be provided. B. Private and public sector markets for recycled rn? will be actively promoted. The City will purchase rec materials and goods made from recycled materials \ possible.. C. Private and public sector waste reduction and r efforts will be actively promoted. Carlsbad will priority consideration to existing private sector, v and non-profit programs and operations in the devela municipal waste reduction and recycling activities. H:\LIBRARY\UH\UPOATA\MlS\~IS9lO7O.AD1 ee I-*- -i= -'-l Ll. : 2- L.-L~.Lsi31L2 Policy; No.46 ( COL'XCZL POLICY- ST,ATE&[ENT Date Issued6 Effective Date General Subject: SOLID WASTE >.UlYAGEhlENT Cancellation D Supersedes Wio Specific Subject: Copies to:' City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File 5. Financinc of Solid Waste Manaaenent Proarams < A. Fees, grants and service fees should find t Waste Prcgram. Waste disposal, in particular subsidized. Facilities and services shou effective as possible. Major disposal facil csnstructed by governmental agencies only af honest public bidding request fcr proposal prscess. In evaluating solid waste managemer! priority will be given to a regional systE control which protects the ratepayer. B. Acquisition, construction and operation facilities. requires an assured, stable sourc is recognized that the City must pledge rev stable capital and cperating funds for t managenent 'facilities used by the City. Carl the sa called "t-io-tier fee" for the disposal C. Fees to mitigate impacts of sclid waste f be impcsed through the CEQA process. Carlsbl fees" as a means to generate revenues for gt Such fees establish an expectation that land for sale. Solid waste facilities should 1 public interest requires; based on environml good, cbjective land use, zoning and plannin Possible adverse environmental effects fri should be identified during the environmer fully mitigated, as required by CEQA. Mit might require the payment of fees to mitigate Such fees must meet the AB 1600 nexus. . Carlsbad has accepted its share of regional facili' environmental process and fully expects others to do t waste facilities. EXHlBl'L' 0 Tentative Schedule of Items and Process for Discussion of JPA Issues for Future Interim Solid Waste Commission Meetings e February 17, 1994 Selection of Independent Legal Counsel JPa4 Item for Discussion: Executive Committee Treasurer & Controller Vote - Weighted Vote Land Use Authority Staff March 3, 1994 Commission Attorney is present JPA Items for Discussion: Transfer of Assets/Contractual Obligations Contracts with Non-Member Agencies Withdrawals and Additions Po ten tial Exposures March 17, 1994 Audit & Budget Subcommittee "Draft" Report on Organization; JPA Items for Discussion: Transition Issues Staff Debts - Financing, Tip Fee, etc. .. BY-~WS Audit & Budget Subcommittee Final Report on Organization: JPA Items for Discussion: April 7,1994 .*. Final Draft JPA Document Presented for Discussion and Distribution to All Entities April 21,1994 JPA Item for Discussion: Potentially, Feedback from All Entities May 5, 1994 JPA Items for Discussion: Potentially, Feedback from All Entities May 19, 1994 Final Meeting of Interim Commission 4 INTfiIM SOLID WASTE C&MIS~O~ -I AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE LISTINGS NCRRA AD HOC SUBCOMMI'ITEE MEMBERS (09/30/93-10/1/93) Pam Slater, Chair Mickey Cafagna, Vice Chair Chuck Du Vivier Bob Fox Edith French F.H. "Corky" Smith AUDITIBUDGET AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS (10/13/93) Pam Slater, Chair Henry Abarbanel, Vice Chair Dal Williams Jack Shelver - Jim Bowersox Richard Hays LEGAL COUNSEL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS (11/18/93) Brian Cochran, Chair Chuck Du Vfvier Ron Morrison ALTElZNATIVE WASTE DISPOSAL/RAILHAULING AD HOC SUBCOMI (12/16/93) Marti Goethe, Chair . Mickey Cafagna, Vice Chair Robert Chamberlain Jerry Harmon GOVERNANCE AD HOC SUBCOMMITJXE (Reactivated 01/13/94, Additional 01/27/94] Bud Lewis Brian Cochran, Chair Ron Morrison Harriet Stockwell Staff: Jack Shelver/Jim Bowersox, Management Committee Lari Sheehan/Lin Wurbs, County of San Diego . 02/0 P,,XHIk511 4 e e 1 February 7,1994 TO: BOARD MEMBERS NORTH COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AGENCY FROM: STAFF STATUS OF REQUEST TO COAsT/E(=Dc AND WASTE MANAGEMENT INC. TO E PROPOSALS At the Board Meeting of January 13, 1994, the Board directed staff to reque CoasVECDC and Waste Management kc. extend the period in which their proposals remain valid to July 31, 1994. Staff has requested and both firms have respor follows: 1. Waste Management Inc. Has formally, in Writing, extended th period for their proposal as requested. Has responded with a proposal, dated Fc 4, 1994, to fondly bind the Agency 1 Agreement to extend their proposal valid: July 1,1995. A brief analysis of their pi Agreement follows. The Coast/ECDC altr disposal proposal will expire on March 2i 2. coast/EcDc. SUMMARY OF COAsT/EcDc PROPOSAL THE PROPOSAL, This Proposal would have the Agency enter into a 20 year contract for 1 transportation and disposal of not less than 50% of the Agency's waste. The Agency would have termhation options on July 1, 1995 and at every anniversary thereafter. Termination could result in capital amortization costs. processing and shipment of waste would be triggered when the County tip exceeded $53.18/ton ($53.18/ton is the Coast/ECDC cost contained in their res the RFP for Altemative Waste Disposal). Disposal capacity would be reserved at no cost to the Agency until July 1,1995. P date, if the Agency is shipping no waste, a capacity reservation fee would have tc 0 e to continue to reserve capacity. ne Proposal would require the Agency to assist Coast/ECDC in obtaining a long term interest in the Palomar Transfer Station and require Coast/ECDC to begin the siting process for a new transfer station at a site satisfactory to the Agency and Coast/ECDC. DISCUSSION The foregoing Agreement and terms were presented to staff at a meeting with the Coast/ECDC principals on Friday, February 4,1994. At that meeting the Proposers advised staff that the proposed Agreement was negotiable and that CoasVECDC was unwilling to extend the period for which their Alternative Disposal Proposal was valid without executing such an Agreement with the Agency. In reviewing the Coast/ECDC February 4, proposal, staff has identified several concerns: The $53.18/ton tip fee which would trigger waste shipment is not a true Hazardous Waste collection and yard waste disposal. A one year Agreement may subject the Agency to unamortized capital payments. To avoid such payments would require negotiation. Would require the Agency to assist ira obtaining long term interest in Palomar Transfer Station. This could commit the Agency to condemnation of the Palomar facility since the County hm previously expressed their adamant opposition to allowing the Palomar facility to compete With NCRRA. Entering into an Agreement such as proposed is essentially entering into an disposal contract and would require the Agency to negotiate the Alternative Disposal contract, since it would be part of the "Proposal Extension". This would require a subszantial commitment of staff time and consulting waste and legal cost. Entering into such an Agreement would send a mixed message to the Interim Waste Commission. On the one hand we say we are committed to regional solutions and on the other hand we negotiate a contract to divert ow waste from the system. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The February 4, 1994 proposed Agreement horn CoasVECDC requires additional clarification to address the concerns identified above. It also appears that if the Agency were to accept the Proposal, substantial effort and cost may have to be expended to negotiate the alternative disposal contract. 1. comparative rate, Le., the County tip fee includes programs like Household 2. 3. 4. 5. e 0 The Agency Board has chosen to defer negotiations and refer the alternative disposal to the Interim Waste Commission for consideration. Staff and Agency Board m Harmon are now working With the Alternative Disposal Comxnittee of the I Commission to explore the alternative disposal options. In view of the concern identified above and Board’s effort to work with the I Commission on alternative disposal, It is recommended that the Agency Bead dire to: Advise Coast/ECDC that the Agency is deferring further discussior alternative disposal contract while the Interim Waste Commission co alterative disposal options, and; Further discuss and define the February 4,1994 Proposal with Cow and return to the March Agency Board meeting with a recomme concerning the Proposal. 1. 2. Attachments 0 a TECDC EYVIROPUWEhT4L. L ( 60 South 600 East, Suite 150 Salt Lake Citv, Utah 84102 Telephone 80 1-355-9 166 Facsimile 801-355-9167 6 February 4, 1994 The Honorable Bud Lewis The Honorable Richard Lyon The Honorable Jerry Harmon Board Members, The North County Solid Waste Management Agency c/o 300 North Hill Street Oceanside, CA 92054 Dear Board Members: We would like to express our appreciation to you and your staff for selecting Coast Waste Management/ ECDC to provide transfer and waste disposal services to your agency. Coast/ECDC are dedicated to providing long-term, secure disposal of the wastes generated from the North County area. In order to expedite the contract negotiations, and maximize the Agency’s flexibility in dealing with the County, CoasVECDC would propose the following: 1) ECDC, Coast, and the Agency would enter into a 20-year transfer, transport, and disposal contract for all waste from the Agency which is not disposed of through the existing County system. The Agency would be given termination options on July I, 1995, and each 5-year anniversary date thereafter, subject to minimal capital penalties. ECDC would reserve 20-year capacity for the Agency. The capacity would be reserved at no cost until July 1, 1995. After July 1, 1995, if the Agency is not shipping at least 50% of the waste generated within the Agency boundary to ECDC through Coast, and assuming the Agency desires to maintain the contract in effect, the Agency would pay Coast and ECDC a capacity reservation fee for the capacity reserved. The actual shipment of waste would be triggered at the time that the County system’s , tippage fee exceeds $53.18 per ton in 1994 dollars. At that time, the Agency agrees to ship not less than 50% of the waste generated within the Agency boundary for the term of the Agreement. 2) 3) 4) I/ m e sJ &@ECDC EFUVIRONMENTAL, L c 5) Coast/ECDC would propose that the contract would allow for inclusion of all Commission Members within 90 days of the execution of the contract. The contract would include provisions which would require the Agency and ECD( to work together to acquire ownership and/or a long-term lease on the Palomar 1 Station. At the same time, Coast/ECDC would be required to file applications fc transfer station within 90 days of the execution of the contract at a site jointly upon by Coast/ECDC and the Agency. 6) The above conceptual plan for a contract between the Agency and CoastlECDC g Agency maximum flexibility in dealing with the County while securing the future. We look forward to meeting with your staff to complete contract drafting. If you h questions with the above, please contact me. Sincerely, A 6 &;A+. e e ong teve eamer f PresidenVCEO, ECDC Environmental, L.C. RSC:sch President, Coast Waste Mar cc: NCSWMAStaff 0 * February 7, 1994 TO: NCSWMA Board Members & Alternates FROM: Kris Murphy, ECDC Environmental RE: Coast/ECDC Letter of Extension As per our attatched letter of 2/4/94 given to the JPA Staff frida. we are very interested in extending our proposal to the JPA until mid-1995 at no cost to the JPA. Our current proposal and prices will expire on March 26, 1994. We look forward to working with you and your staff to execute an agreement by March 26th’ which will provide maximum flexibility in dealing with the County as well as provide a long-term option if t JPA decides to depart the County system in the future. cc: NCSWMA Staff