This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

Transcription

1

2 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

3 Table of Contents 0.0 Executive Summary Introduction Background Project Purpose Project Scope Baseline of the Current Situation Generation Collection Transfer Processing and Disposal End Markets Summary of Baseline Findings Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals Vision Guiding Principles Goals Potential Strategies Initial List of Potential Strategies Revised List of Potential Strategies Stakeholder Feedback Short List of Recommended Strategies Recommended Strategies Evaluation Strategy #1: Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste and C&D debris Overview Benefits Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Potential Challenges Environmental Impact Local Economic Impact Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Strategy #2: Adopt a C&D diversion ordinance, require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans including a 50% diversion requirement, and educate building contractors i

4 5.2.1 Overview Benefits Discussion of Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Potential Challenges Environmental Impact Local Economic Impact Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Strategy #3: Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials Overview Benefits Discussion of Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Potential Challenges Environmental Impact Local Economic Impact Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Strategy #4: C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) Overview Benefits Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Potential Challenges Environmental Impact Local Economic Impact Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Strategy #5: Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers Overview Benefits Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Potential Challenges Environmental Impact Local Economic Impact Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Planning Level Diversion Estimates and Impacts ii

5 5.6.1 Planning Level Diversion Estimates Environmental Impacts EPA WARM Results Planning Level Job Creation Estimates Implementation Schedule Future Recommendations List of Figures Figure 2 1 Orange County Landfill Class III Waste (FY 1995/96 to 2009/10)... 8 Figure 2 2 Plastic Pipe Figure 2 3 Separated Wood Waste Figure 4 1 Picking Station and Feed Material Figure 4 2 Crushed Concrete List of Tables Table ES 1 Estimated Tonnage of Target Waste Type Generated, Diverted & Disposed, Table ES 2 Effect on Carbon Emissions (Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, MTCO2E)... 3 Table ES 3 Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion As Compared to the Status Quo [1]... 3 Table 2 1 Orange County Landfill and County Wide Class III/C&D Projections (ton/yr)... 9 Table 2 2 Typical New Products and Uses for Recycled Material Table 5 1 C&D Waste Reporting By Type of Business Table 5 2 Estimated Tonnage of Target Waste Type Generated, Diverted & Disposed, Table 5 3 Effect on Carbon Emissions (Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, MTCO2E).. 39 Table 5 4 Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion As Compared to the Status Quo [1] Table 6 1 Implementation Schedule iii

6 Appendices Appendix A: Summary of Current Situation Report Appendix B: Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals Stakeholder Meeting Presentation Appendix C: Draft Management Strategies Appendix D: Strategies Stakeholder Meeting Presentation Appendix E: Strategies Ranking Matrix and Memorandum Appendix F: Lee County Waste Management Plan Form Acknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE EE Orange County and the HDR project team would like to thank the stakeholders that took part in the development of this plan. Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. iv

7 0.0 Executive Summary By evaluating, identifying, and implementing strategies for the improved management of Class III and C&D Debris (Target Waste Types), Orange County can position itself to divert more waste from landfills in the future. With the State s recent adoption of a 75% recycling and diversion goal from landfills by 2020, diversion efforts for the Target Waste Types can help the County move toward reaching this goal. Examining options for increasing the diversion and recycling of Target Waste Types is important due to the fact that it has historically represented approximately 40 percent of the overall County waste stream. In order to meet future goals and solid waste challenges, the County initiated development of this Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP). The intent of this activity was to develop a course of action to ensure that Orange County manages solid waste in the most sustainable manner. The goal of this SWIRP is to serve as a strategic planning tool for the management of Target Waste Types generated within or transported into the County. This project was funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Development of the SWIRP required identification of short and long term solid waste management needs and priorities, including: (i) an evaluation of existing management tools, current trends in generation and disposition, and trends for the future; (ii) identification of alternatives and development of a comprehensive feasibility matrix of long term options; and (iii) an innovative public involvement process to outline the County s objectives to provide sustainability, resource conservation, source reduction, recycling, renewable energy, maximum material recovery, and environmental protection. The various sections of this report present the processes, findings, and recommendations associated with completing the development of the SWIRP. Section 1 provides the background for the project, as well as a summary of the current Target Waste Type situation in the County. Section 2 provides a summary of the current status of generation, collection, transfer, processing, and disposal of the Target Waste Types within Orange County. Section 3 outlines the Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals that were established for this effort. Section 4 describes the various alternatives for managing the Target Waste Types that were researched and evaluated as part of this project. It also provides information on the process used to short list the preferred strategies, including a description of the stakeholder outreach process and outcome. 1

8 Section 5 presents the five recommended strategies that resulted from this effort. A detailed description and analysis of each recommended strategy is provided, along with projected planning level diversion, environmental, and economic impacts. Section 6 presents the proposed implementation schedule for the five recommended strategies. The final list of strategies recommended for further evaluation include: 1. Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data. 2. Adopt a C&D diversion ordinance, require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans including a 50% diversion requirement, and educate building contractors. 3. Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials to be promoted at the state and/or regional level. 4. C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee). 5. Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers. It is anticipated that each of these strategies would assist in the further development of local end markets by creating a more consistent and reliable supply of materials. In order to provide planning level estimates of the amount of additional diversion that could be attained through implementation of each of the recommended strategies, HDR developed the following table with input from County staff. Table ES 1 presents the estimated tonnage of the Target Waste Types that are projected to be generated, diverted and disposed in 2020, based on the status quo scenario versus implementation of the five individual recommended strategies. Table ES 1 Estimated Tonnage of Target Waste Type Generated, Diverted & Disposed, 2020 Estimated Percent Diverted Projected Class III & C&D Tonnage (2020) Status Quo By Strategy Total Generated Diverted Disposed Status Quo 28% 28% 1,221, , ,552 Strategy 1 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Strategy 2 28% 22% 50% 1,221, , ,800 Strategy 3 28% 10% 38% 1,221, , ,392 Strategy 4 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Strategy 5 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Table ES 2 shows the effects of the strategies for plan year As shown in Table 5 3, the WARM model estimates the carbon emissions and emission offsets produced throughout the lifecycle of the material based on a baseline scenario (no new programs) versus alternative scenarios for the tons of materials managed in

9 Table ES 2 Effect on Carbon Emissions (Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, MTCO2E) Additional Reduction Due to Recycling Additional Reduction Due to Composting Combined Reduction from Strategy Total Emissions Status Quo N/A N/A N/A (52,948) Strategy 1 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Strategy 2 (319,998) (5,366) (325,364) (378,312) Strategy 3 (145,455) (2,439) (147,894) (200,842) Strategy 4 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Strategy 5 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Table ES 3 provides planning level estimates of the number of jobs that could be created as a result of the projected increase in diversion of the Target Waste Types associated with each of the five recommended strategies. Based on a study by the Institute for Local Self Reliance, which analyzed the economic impacts of recycling, an average of 3.62 processing jobs are created for each additional 10,000 tons of C&D debris diverted per year. Based on that assumption, Strategy 2 is projected to have the greatest impact on job creation, with a total of 97 additional processing jobs created to handle the amount of material projected to be diverted in Table ES 3 Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion As Compared to the Status Quo [1] Processing Jobs/10,000 TPY [1] Projected Tons Diverted (2020) Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion Status Quo ,832 N/A Strategy ,264 9 Strategy , Strategy , Strategy ,264 9 Strategy ,264 9 [1] Based on "Recycling Economic Development through Scrap Based Manufacturing" (Michael Lewis, 1994), Institute for Local Self Reliance Assumptions; 3.62 is the average number of processing jobs per 10,000 TPY for the Mixed C&D, Lumber, and Other C&D categories. 3

10 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background Orange County has the significant responsibility of providing solid waste collection, recycling and disposal services for the 5 th largest population in Florida, and one of the largest in the United States. In addition to a population of over 1.1 million, Orange County also serves an estimated 48 million travelers annually. It has the challenging task of handling, recycling, and disposing of nearly one million tons per year of municipal solid waste. The County s mission is to provide effective and efficient solid waste services, and the necessary facilities to support continued population growth. Construction and Demolition debris (C&D debris) refers to materials that are non water soluble and non hazardous in nature which are generated from construction, demolition, and renovation projects. Some examples of C&D debris include steel, glass, brick, concrete, asphalt, pipe, gypsum wallboard, and lumber. C&D debris also includes rock, soil, trees, and other vegetative matter that normally result from land clearing or land development operations associated with construction projects. Class III waste refers to a broader category of materials that includes: yard trash, C&D debris, processed tires, asbestos, carpet, cardboard, paper, glass, plastic, and furniture other than appliances. This Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP) focuses specifically on the management of C&D debris and Class III waste (Target Waste Types) generated within Orange County. Examining options for increasing the diversion and recycling of Target Waste Types is important due to the fact that it has historically represented approximately 40 percent of the overall County waste stream. These materials will continue to be generated in the future as the local population continues to grow, and construction, demolition, and renovation projects are undertaken in order to accommodate the needs of the growing population. By evaluating, identifying, and implementing strategies for the improved management of these materials, Orange County can position itself to divert more waste from landfills in the future. With the State s recent adoption of a 75% recycling and diversion goal from landfills by 2020, diversion efforts for the Target Waste Types can help the County can move toward reaching this goal. 4

11 1.2 Project Purpose In order to meet future goals and solid waste challenges, the County initiated development of this Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP). The intent of this activity was to develop a course of action to ensure that Orange County manages solid waste in the most sustainable manner. The goal of this SWIRP is to serve as a strategic planning tool for the management of Target Waste Types generated within or transported into the County. This document addresses the unique regulatory framework, governance goals, market conditions, growth trends, and stakeholder feedback specific to Orange County and the Target Waste Types. This project was funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). It is one of many projects funded by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECGB) administered by the Department of Energy (DOE). This EECBG funded project is a listed activity under the Material Conservation Program category. 1.3 Project Scope Development of the SWIRP required identification of short and long term solid waste management needs and priorities, including: (i) an evaluation of existing management tools, current trends in generation and disposition, and trends for the future; (ii) identification of alternatives and development of a comprehensive feasibility matrix of long term options; and (iii) an innovative public involvement process to outline the County s objectives to provide sustainability, resource conservation, source reduction, recycling, renewable energy, maximum material recovery, and environmental protection. The various sections of this report present the processes, findings, and recommendations associated with completing the development of the SWIRP. Section 2 provides a summary of the current status of generation, collection, transfer, processing, and disposal of the Target Waste Types within Orange County. Section 3 outlines the Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals that were established for this effort. Section 4 describes the various alternatives for managing the Target Waste Types that were researched and evaluated as part of this project. It also provides information on the process used to short list the preferred strategies. Section 5 presents the five recommended strategies that resulted from this effort. A detailed description and analysis of each recommended strategy is provided, along with projected planning level diversion, environmental, and economic impacts. Section 6 presents the proposed implementation schedule for the five recommended strategies. 5

12 HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), along with sub consultants EPIC Engineering and Consulting Group, LLC (EPIC) and Baker Wettstein Marketing and Public Relations Inc., were retained by Orange County to assist with the development of the SWIRP. 2.0 Baseline of the Current Situation Orange County s solid waste needs are met by both the County s infrastructure and the private sector. Most of the municipal solid waste (Class I waste) is collected and delivered to either of the two publicly owned transfer stations or directly to the Orange County Landfill, located on Young Pine Road. Class III and C&D debris (Target Waste Types) are collected and processed/disposed by both the public and private sector. The Orange County Environmental Protection Division (EPD) is responsible for the permitting and compliance oversight of several private facilities for the Target Waste Type. Orange County operates an unlined Class III landfill at their Young Pine Road facility. This facility is currently undergoing a partial closure, but still has substantial remaining capacity for the disposal of Class III waste. There are three privately owned and operated active Class III landfills in Orange County. One unlined facility (Golden Gem Road Class III Landfill) is under the jurisdiction of Orange County EPD. The other two (Keene Road Landfill (closed) and Vista Landfill) were annexed into the City of Apopka. One of these facilities (Keene Road) is unlined and the other is lined. There are also three privately owned unlined C&D landfills in Orange County. They are Mid Florida Materials C&D, Pine Ridge Recycling and Disposal Facility, and West Orange Environmental Resources ( operated by Orange County Environmental, LLC) C&D. These private facilities are under the jurisdiction of the Orange County EPD. The opportunity for new private disposal sites within the County is unclear due to uncertainty of the need for such facilities, difficulty with identifying a suitable location, as well as potential public opposition. The private disposal facilities for the Target Waste Type are located generally in the west and northwest section of the County. This northwest area of the County also coincides with the Wekiva Study Area of the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act (F.S. 369 Part III). The 2009 report entitled Siting of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Facilities in Unincorporated Orange County within the Wekiva Study Area recommends stringent regulatory controls which require additional hydrogeotechnical investigation, additional controls (e.g. upgraded liner) or outright prohibition. As part of the County s Orange to Green initiatives, one of the Green Building Forum sessions focused on recycling of C&D debris. As noted in the Summary Report prepared by the Green Building Committee in June of 2010, Session Four (Recycling) included three panelists (Robyn Dowsey of the Wharton Smith construction group, Damon Powell of Waste Management, and Ian McCook of Nvision) who shared their expertise in this area, and verified that recycling of construction debris did not significantly increase their costs or site management labor. During the subsequent keypad polling session, audience members unanimously stated that the recycling of 6

13 construction debris should be considered a priority. Additional polling results revealed that 38 percent of attendees replied that the recycling of 80 percent of construction and demolition waste should be required, 33 percent said that 60 percent should be obligatory, and 29 percent believed the recycling of all waste should be mandatory. Before a framework could be established for developing the SWIRP, it was important to understand the current situation in Orange County regarding generation and management of the Target Waste Types. Therefore, HDR and EPIC developed a Summary of the Current Situation report documenting the following items related to the Target Waste Types: Waste generation (historical and future trends), including projections for future rates of generation of these wastes; Inventory of solid waste management facilities within Orange County; and Current management practices regarding collection, transfer, processing/disposal and end markets, as well as trends regarding source separation, reuse, recycling, conversion to energy, and disposal. The following sections summarize the key findings from that report. The complete report is included as Appendix A. 2.1 Generation The majority of Class III waste and C&D debris is generated at construction, demolition, or renovation job sites and collected in large roll off containers. Some of the materials generated may be source separated and re used in various on site applications. Other materials may be source separated at the site for collection by a hauler and subsequent delivery to a processing facility that specializes in the sorting and marketing of these materials for recycling or composting. Class III and C&D debris that is not source separated on site is typically collected by haulers and delivered to one of a number of Class III or C&D landfills for disposal. Some Class III waste may also be generated from other locations, such as manufacturing or retail businesses that separate these inert materials for recycling or disposal. The first step in documenting the current condition was to identify the source and type of waste (i.e. Target Waste Types) and the amount of material expected to be generated. Available data from previous studies was used to show historical and projected target waste disposed in Orange County as well as waste generation projections for the Target Waste Types. The primary sources of information for historical waste generation and projections were the Orange County Solid Waste Division and the Final Report Solid Waste Master Plan, Orange County Solid Waste Division (SCS Engineers, January 30, 2009). Historical Class III and C&D information is available for the Orange County Landfill. As shown on Figure 2 1, waste generation increased dramatically between 2002 and 2005, and sustained 7

14 elevated levels through 2008; however, the current generation rate is similar to the generation rate in the late 1990 s. It should be noted that in late 2004 and early 2005, central Florida was hit by three hurricanes generating large amounts of disaster debris, which impacted the Class III waste tonnage shown in Figure 2 1 below. Figure 2 1 Orange County Landfill Class III Waste (FY 1995/96 to 2009/10) Waste, cy 700, , , , , , ,000 0 Yard Waste Fiscal Year As part of the Solid Waste Master Plan (referenced above), County wide and Orange County Landfill projections for Class III and C&D waste were developed. Although the final master plan document is dated 2009, the projections were originally developed in As a result, the projections were influenced significantly by the higher waste generation and increasing generation trends observed at that time. Current Class III and C&D waste disposal and processing is significantly lower than the amount projected in 2003 for both the Orange County Landfill and County wide. Information regarding Class III waste is readily available for the Orange County Landfill; consequently, it was used as a basis for further analysis and adjustment of the County wide data. The actual amount of Class III waste entering the Orange County Landfill in 2010 was approximately 45% lower than the amount projected in This was due in part to the economic downturn; however, some of the effect could have also been related to new facilities opening in the area. The 45% decrease was applied to County wide waste amounts to estimate current County wide waste disposal rates. The most recent University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) medium growth rate projections for Orange County were then used to project County wide generation through the planning period. 8

15 Table 2 1 summarizes the Orange County Landfill and County wide projections through 2050 and presents an adjusted projection, as well as a mid point projection (between the 2003 projection and adjusted projection). Table 2 1 Orange County Landfill and County Wide Class III/C&D Projections (ton/yr) Orange County Landfill Class III Disposal County Wide Class III and C&D Generation Annual Projected Year Actual Projected Growth Rate from Prior Period, % Projected in 2003 Adjusted Projection Mid Point Between 2003 and Adjusted , , ,810 1,255, , , % 1,268, , , , , , , % 1,413, , , % 1,693, ,900 1,221, , % 1,955, ,300 1,412, , % 2,246, ,800 1,623, , % 2,524,302 1,123,600 1,824,000 Notes: 1. Final Report Solid Waste Master Plan, Orange County Solid Waste Division (SCS Engineers, January 30, 2009) 2. The difference between OCL 2010 projected and actual is 45%. This was used to adjust County Wide projections; then the most recent BEBR medium growth rates for Orange County were used to project generation through the planning period. The most recent growth rates are very similar to the growth rates used for the 2003 projections. It should be noted that because of the available housing capacity in the County, current and short term projected housing generated waste may not necessarily track with population. 3. Average annual growth rate (2003 to 2050) is 1.8%. 4. Table 3 2 presents County Wide waste generation. Based on information from processing/disposal facilities (See Section 7 of Appendix A Summary of Current Situation ), it is estimated that in ,000 to 1,000,000 tons of Class III and C&D waste were processed at facilities in Orange County. It is difficult to accurately report County Wide amounts due to lack of available data and inconsistency of data reporting (i.e. some facilities accept waste in cubic yards and some in tons). As development and economic conditions return to a more typical pattern, waste generation is expected to increase as shown in Table 2-1 Table 2 1, with the actual amount predicted to be somewhere between the projected and adjusted values. 9

16 2.2 Collection Collection and transportation of Target Waste Types is provided by commercial haulers, as well as demolition companies and other private entities. Based on information from Orange County Solid Waste Division, approximately 60 to 70% of the Class III waste sent to the County landfill is from account holders (which are generally the licensed commercial haulers) with the remainder from homeowners and other private construction or hauling companies. Licensed commercial haulers and other entities (such as large demolition contractors) identified by the Orange County EPD were contacted and requested to provide the following types of information: Type of business and waste generation/collection activities; Amount collected and transported; Type of projects, including source separated waste and LEED certified; Type of material recycled and estimated amount of recycled materials; and Disposal or transfer of material. General findings included the following: Based on the information collected, it appears that an average recycling rate is 15 to 20%; Many hauling companies provide recycling by hauling source separated material directly to processors ( end market recyclers ) or directly to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for customer requested LEED certification; Demolition companies provide a higher level of recycling (approximately 30 to 50%) to maximize project profit; and Concrete, cardboard and metal appear to be the most commonly and easily recycled materials. 2.3 Transfer Transfer of Class I waste is fairly common and a significant part of managing the overall waste stream; however, based on interviews, transfer does not appear to be a significant component or step in the current management of the Target Waste Types. Typically, hauling companies transport C&D debris/class III waste to the closest facility. If source separation is requested by the customer or for LEED certification, separate containers are provided and the waste is transported directly to the facility. As the industry develops, it is anticipated that transfer of loads for recycling will become an integral part of management practices. 10

17 2.4 Processing and Disposal Processing refers to the sorting and separation of recyclable materials into like items for subsequent sale to end markets. The extent of processing, and consequently disposal, varies considerably throughout the County. In recent years, many communities and builders have been giving increasing thought to the diversion and recycling of Class III and C&D debris. The increasing demand for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified buildings and facilities and newly adopted industry standards such as the National Green Building Standard, have placed a focus on the improved management of these materials. 1 There are a number of permitted C&D, Class III and mixed waste recycling facilities in Orange County. In addition to accepting local waste, these facilities also handle waste from other areas, including Hillsborough County, Pinellas County and neighboring Counties. Permitted facilities were contacted and requested to provide the following types of information: Location and waste disposal/processing activities; Type and amount of material handled; Figure 2 2 Plastic Pipe Current recycling practices, including type of material recycled, end market recyclers and amount of material recycled; Processing capacity; and Remaining disposal capacity. The following map identifies the locations of the 13 processing facilities and 6 disposal facilities for the Target Waste Types within Orange County, as well as one additional disposal facility located in Lake County due to its close proximity. Figure 2 3 Separated Wood Waste 1 Designations such as the U.S. Green Building Council s LEED Certification and the Florida Green Building Coalition s Green Certification Program require documentation that certain sustainable practices were used in the construction, demolition or renovation project being evaluated. Points needed for certification are awarded for certain waste minimization strategies and the incorporation of reused or recycled content materials into the project. 11

18 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

19 CR 455 CR 439 KIRKMAN RD ORANGE BLOSSOM TRAIL SEMORAN BLVD FRENCH AVE NARCOOSSEE RD CR 448 CR 455 CR 48 SR 46!( «6 «4 SR 46 «5!(!U CR 437 CR 44A CR437 SR 46 SR 44 CR 46 A ORANGE BLOSSOM TRL «12!( «2 #* SR 46 MAITLAND BLVD SR 46 ALTAMONTE DR MAITLAND BLVD C R BEALL BLVD 1ST ST US 17/92 SR 434 SR 46 E LAKE MARY BLVD CENTRAL AV SR 46 SR 415 SR 415 OSCEOLA RD CR 426 SR 46 SR 46 SR 46 / MAIN ST US 1 US 1 US 1 Legend O! ASH MONOFIL!( C & D LANDFILL!U C & D LANDFILL/MATERIAL RECOVERY #* C & D RECYCLING!( CLASS III LANDFILL!U CLASS III LANDFILL/MATERIAL RECOVERY #* MATERIAL RECOVERY ORANGE COUNTY US 27 SR 50 CR 474 CR 455 CR 455 US 27 SR 50 W B BILL MCGEE HWY!U US 192!( #* WEST BRONSON HWY MARTIN LUTHER KING B JOHN YOUNG PKWY JOHN YOUNG PKWY LEE RD #* ORANGE AV HANSEL AVE OSCEOLA PKWY ALOMA AV «!( 9 «7 «3 «13 «1 «#* 11 «10 ALAFAYA TR!( LAKE PICKETT RD «8! CR 419 COLONIAL DR SR 528 / BEACHLINE COLONIAL DR SR528 BEACHLINE EXP SR 520 CHENEY HIGHWAY SR 407 SR 520 ID Facility Name 1 AMERICAN RECYCLING GROUP, LLC 2 ANGELO'S RECYCLED MATERIALS INC 3 BAY LAKE CLASS 3 LANDFILL 4 GOLDEN GEM ROAD CLASS III LANDFILL 5 MID-FLORIDA MATERIALS (HUBBARD) 6 MT DORA DISPOSAL FACILITY 7 ORANGE COUNTY LF 8 OUC STANTON ENERGY CENTER 9 PINE RIDGE LANDFILL 10 ROCKET BLVD MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY 11 TAFT RECYCLING (SOUTH ORLANDO MRF) 12 VISTA LANDFILL, LLC., CLASS III 13 WEST ORANGE ENV. RESOURCES C&D US 27 VINE ST VINE ST NOVA RD ORANGE COUNTY SOILD WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCES PLAN Miles SCALE CLASS III, C&D AND RECYCLING FACILITIES FIGURE 8-1

20 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

21 For those facilities where tipping fee data was available, C&D processing fees varied from $25 to $41 per ton, and C&D disposal fees varied from $18 to $25 per ton. Recycling infrastructure and markets for many Class III materials such as vegetative waste are already fairly well developed in the region. In addition, other specialty wastes, that are part of Class III waste, such as tires and waste oil, already have well defined recycling programs. As a result, the strategies developed as part of this project focus on C&D type waste streams. 2.5 End Markets The term end market refers to the final processor of the material that prepares it for sale as a bulk raw material or other product. Examples include concrete crushers and metals processors (shredding and re sale of bulk material in the metals market). Table 2 2 lists some of the common new products or uses for recycled C&D materials. Table 2 2 Typical New Products and Uses for Recycled Material Used C&D Material New Product Use Cardboard Raw material Raw material for boxes and containers Concrete Aggregate Base for road building Drainage applications / Bank stabilization Metal Raw material Raw material for metals fabricators Plastic pipe Raw material Raw material for plastic and pipe Wood Mulch Landscaping / Erosion control Industrial fuel source Compost additive / Soil amendment Based on information from the waste haulers and processors, a partial list of 20 local end market companies was compiled, with many of those companies having multiple facilities throughout the County. The primary materials handled by these companies were asphalt, concrete, and metals. 13

22 2.6 Summary of Baseline Findings In general, three basic methods of C&D recycling were documented within the County: On site source separation (separate roll offs provided for each type of material); Some level of deconstruction or removing of components prior to demolition; and Mixed waste recycling. The industry is currently fairly fragmented and recycling typically occurs through either customer requests (i.e. LEED certification efforts) or profit considerations (i.e. demolition companies). Mixed waste recycling is a relatively new industry in central Florida. Additional findings are summarized as follows: Some level of recycling occurs throughout the process of collection, hauling and disposing of C&D debris. Based on the reported information, approximately 20% of the C&D waste stream is being recycled. The amount of recycling is much higher for concrete and metal. Limited uses and markets are available for wood, and less for dry wall and plastic pipe. The amount of recycling is very dependent on the generator goals. Information regarding the amount of waste and recycling is not readily or consistently recorded. Material is measured in multiple units (tons, cubic yards, loads, etc) which make tracking, record keeping and data analysis difficult. There appears to be increasing specialization as waste is moved through from collection to end market. There is uncertainty about potential rule changes based on the new State 75% recycling goal, and its impacts on C&D material. Florida Administrative Code modification efforts were initiated in early 2012, but have not been completed at the time of this report. The current major barriers to the recycling of C&D wastes in Orange County appear to be: o Lack of established end markets o Landfilling affordability vs. the cost to recycle o Lack of a mature infrastructure for processing and marketing 14

23 3.0 Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals Public involvement was integral throughout the course of this project, and feedback was solicited from various stakeholder groups regarding the Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals, as well as each of the potential strategies and evaluation criteria. At the first stakeholder meeting, held in May 2011, the results of the Summary of Current Situation report were presented to the group in order to provide context for the discussion. The draft Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals were also presented to the group. Attended by 27 industry stakeholders, the feedback was documented and taken into account for finalizing these elements of the Plan. The May 2011 presentation is provided in Appendix B. The following three sections describe the final Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals that were established for this project. 3.1 Vision We foresee a community that manages its construction and demolition debris, and other Class III solid waste, in the most economically sustainable, environmentally responsible, and socially equitable manner, by guiding the actions of an integrated system of consumers, generators, haulers, processors and recyclers, waste to energy converters, and disposal facilities. 3.2 Guiding Principles 1. The integrated system should be economically efficient and sustainable: a. For the integrated system overall, and secondarily for individual sectors of the system; b. By establishing public/private partnerships that foster innovative solutions; c. By developing viable end markets for recycled materials; and d. By adding economic value to the community, including the creation of jobs. 2. The integrated system should be environmentally responsible and sustainable: a. By following the EPA Waste Management hierarchy a prioritized sequence of reducing generation, recycling and composting, converting waste to energy, and then safe disposal; b. By reusing materials at their highest value (e.g. reuse in similar products); and c. By reducing greenhouse gases and conserving energy. 15

24 3.3 Goals 3. The integrated system should be socially equitable and sustainable: a. By not unfairly rewarding or penalizing one constituency or region over another; and b. By not unfairly rewarding or penalizing one sector of the integrated system over another. 4. Lead locally within a regional, state, national, and global framework: a. By setting local goals that meet or exceed State and National goals; b. By considering impacts of policies of other governments within the region; c. By finding solutions that are consistent with the branding of the community and local businesses; and d. While not adversely impacting existing County legal, financial or contractual obligations. The following goals are meant to specifically address expected milestones and outcomes of the Plan, reflecting the vision and the guiding principles of the community. 1. Adopt a streamlined reporting process to better track where Target Waste Types are generated and delivered, by (Reporting process to address State requirements at a minimum, but may go further to address County goals.) 2. Establish a baseline of C&D disposed per permitted square foot in the County by the end of Reduce the baseline C&D disposed per permitted square foot by 10% by 2016; by 20% by 2018; and by 30% by Divert 40% of the Target Waste Types (Class III and C&D) by December 31, 2012, 50% by December 31, 2014, 60% by December 31, 2016, 70% by December 31, 2018, and 75% by December 31, 2020 (State goals). 4.0 Potential Strategies The next step in the development of the SWIRP was to research and describe various alternatives for managing the Target Waste Types. HDR and EPIC researched and evaluated a wide variety of potential strategies with particular consideration given to elements such as infrastructure, programs, policies, regulations, incentives, technological innovation, and financial strategies. As previously mentioned, recycling infrastructure and markets for many Class III materials such as vegetative waste are already fairly well developed in the region. In addition, other specialty 16

25 wastes, that are part of Class III waste, such as tires and waste oil, already have well defined recycling programs. As a result, the strategies developed as part of this project focus on C&D debris. 4.1 Initial List of Potential Strategies The following initial list of 12 potential strategies was developed and presented to County staff for further evaluation and discussion. C&D Diversion Ordinance: Adopt and implement a C&D diversion ordinance. C&D Waste Management Plan: Require newly constructed buildings to develop a waste management plan and divert at least 50% of the construction materials generated during the project. Educational Outreach: Inform contractors about alternatives to landfill disposal of their C&D waste. Education and outreach for facilities: teach them how, use case studies; what are the labor, machinery, and equipment costs associated with recycling? [From stakeholder meeting] County put aside money to educate the public. [from stakeholder meeting] Policy: Adopt a C&D diversion policy that strongly encourages the diversion of C&D materials. A policy can: o Serve as a viable alternative to an ordinance when a jurisdiction does not have the time and resources necessary to fully implement an ordinance. o Be used as a "stepping stone" in the ordinance process. Once a policy is in place and a C&D diversion program is established, a jurisdiction can determine over time if an ordinance would be more effective, or if a policy is adequately achieving diversion of C&D waste. Specifications: Incorporate recycled content specifications into local building projects. Building Green: Require the use of recovered and recycled C&D materials. Motivate homebuilders, etc. to be more sustainable. [from stakeholder meeting] Incentive Programs for Waste Haulers: Establish a rebate incentive with haulers of C&D material. Projected plan, publicly announced (allow time for end markets and infrastructure to develop so that demand for recyclables matches supply). [from stakeholder meeting] Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste. 4.2 Revised List of Potential Strategies Each of the above potential strategies was evaluated by HDR and County staff for consistency with the Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals that were developed as part of this project. Based on those evaluations, some of the potential strategies were combined, while others were removed 17

26 from the list due to poor potential for success, implementation issues, inconsistencies with the Guiding Principles, and/or low anticipated outcomes in achieving the Goals of the project. Based on these evaluations, the list was narrowed to the following eight potential strategies. More detailed descriptions of these potential strategies are included in Appendix C. 1. Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, haulers, and/or destination facility data. The current system of landfills and material recovery facilities (MRFs) reporting to the state is not sufficient in terms of helping the County to understand the quantity of materials generated inside and outside of the County. The County can improve reporting on the generation, recycling and disposal of Class III and C&D waste through the building permit process, haulers, and/or destination facilities. 2. Job Site Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion Plan Adopt and implement a C&D diversion ordinance that includes the requirement to prepare a diversion plan and divert a certain percentage of materials from construction, demolition and renovation projects (e.g. 50% of all materials; or 75% of inerts such as asphalt, brick, concrete, dirt, fines, rock, sand, soil and stone, and 50% of remainder). Diversion could include options like deconstruction or the careful disassembly of buildings components for reuse, the reuse of recovered materials on site or off site, off site recycling, or perhaps even waste to energy. A diversion plan would be submitted for most projects for which a building permit is required. As a local (land use) ordinance, reporting on the implementation of the diversion plan would be required prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 3. C&D Pre Processing Prior to Disposal Adopt and implement a C&D diversion ordinance that requires pre processing prior to disposal. This strategy was recommended by FDEP in its 2010 report to the 2010 Florida Legislature and subsequently adopted as amendments to Florida Statute 403. One consideration of the FS language is the provision of a not well defined extent economically feasible clause. Figure 4 1 Picking Station and Feed Material A local ordinance should mirror the Florida Statute and FAC Rules while clarifying the criteria that will be used at the local level for determining whether pre processing is required or not. Potential approaches include defining general thresholds for economic feasibility (e.g. remaining facility capacity and expected life) and requiring facilities to 18

27 submit documentation to the County regarding the feasibility or infeasibility of pre processing. 4. Landfill Ban for Certain Types of C&D Materials Establish an Ordinance that bans the disposal of certain types of materials. Identify materials with sufficient recycling potential (such as asphalt, brick, concrete, cardboard, and wood) and establish maximum allowable percentages of components in loads tipped at landfills. For example, loads must contain less than a specified number of tons or a specified percentage of a particular material; otherwise it must be diverted for segregation and recycling prior to disposal. This could be accomplished in a stepped approach, starting with a material like concrete that is already being recycled by many, then adding metals for which there are good markets, and later adding other materials that there may be less demand for. This would need to be a cooperative effort between the County and local municipalities, and would require State and regional support. Figure 4 2 Crushed Concrete 5. Building Contractor Education Develop educational information and outreach methods to inform contractors of alternatives to landfill disposal of C&D debris. Contractor education programs typically aim to illustrate the environmental and economic value of C&D recycling to contractors and provide them with information on local resources and alternatives, with the goal of encouraging a change in their thinking and behavior related to C&D reuse and recycling. Examples of possible topics to be covered include: green building practices focused on waste reduction, deconstruction, on site source separation, recycling at mixed waste or C&D processing facilities, and information regarding any local C&D ordinances, resources, or incentive programs. 6. C&D Disposal Surcharge (Community Host Fee) Enact a surcharge for landfill disposal of C&D debris and use the proceeds to support waste diversion and public education efforts. Funds could be utilized to support other strategies for implementation, such as developing data gathering and reporting mechanisms (i.e. database and links to building permit applications). This would be most effective as a cooperative effort with local municipalities in order to be consistent throughout the County, and pool resources for funding consistent public education efforts. 7. Adopt C&D Diversion Policies and Procedures that Strongly Encourage the Diversion of C&D Materials Policies would be in the form of an informal advisory document or a program that strongly encourages the diversion of C&D materials, but would not provide the kind of enforcement 19

28 mechanism that an ordinance would provide. It would simply express a preference on the part of the County that C&D debris be diverted for reuse or recycling wherever feasible. The purpose of such a policy is to encourage C&D diversion without actually requiring it. This can be a viable alternative to an ordinance when a jurisdiction does not have the time and resources necessary to fully implement an ordinance. It can also be used as a "stepping stone", moving toward an ordinance requiring diversion. 8. Establish a C&D Recycling Incentive Program for Waste Haulers Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers that would encourage them to increase diversion of C&D material. This could be accomplished through modifications to existing licensing procedures with the C&D waste haulers in the County, and providing incentives for C&D diversion through commensurate license fee decreases or rebates (or establish disincentives with commensurate fee increases for disposal versus recycling of C&D waste). This approach would require annual reporting on the part of the haulers. Another option would be to provide rebates to haulers or contractors for the delivery of C&D material to recycling facilities. Under such a program, levels of recyclables delivered to recycling facilities would be documented and communicated to the County which would issue the rebates. Rebate programs are typically voluntary. 4.3 Stakeholder Feedback The eight potential strategies listed above were presented to the stakeholder group at a public workshop in the Orange County Commission Chambers on February 28, The workshop was attended by approximately 25 people, including representatives from public and private industry, including state and local government representatives, generators, haulers, processors, and disposal facility representatives. Approximately 34% of the attendees were state and local government representatives, 18% were disposal facility representatives, another 18% were processors, 15% were haulers, 12% were consultants, and 3% were generators. The purpose of the stakeholder meeting was to foster discussion with the group regarding each of the potential management strategies and to obtain feedback that would assist the County and HDR in refining the final strategy recommendations to be included in the SWIRP. In order to assist the County and HDR in short listing the five or six strategies that would be most effective in addressing diversion of the Target Waste Types, participants in the stakeholder meeting were asked to indicate which strategies they felt would be least effective in reaching the goals of the SWIRP through a dot voting process. The February 2012 presentation is provided in Appendix D. Following the February stakeholder meeting, further discussions were held among County staff from the Environmental Protection Division, the Solid Waste Division, the Division of Building Safety, and staff from HDR and EPIC in order to discuss the feedback received from stakeholders and finalize the strategies that would be short listed for further analysis. HDR and County staff also reached out to Lee County, FL staff regarding their existing C&D diversion ordinance and the 20

29 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection regarding their disposal ban on certain C&D materials. HDR had a follow up discussion with a representative from one of the larger construction companies in the County to further discuss the strategies that would impact the construction industry; specifically Strategy #1, streamlining the reporting process and Strategy #2, adopt a C&D diversion ordinance. Related to reporting, this particular company already requires their C&D haulers to report as part of their corporate sustainability commitment. Having the County require haulers to report would, in this representative s opinion, reiterate what is required by this company, making it easier to enforce the reporting. This company representative was also very supportive of a C&D diversion ordinance requiring that a certain percentage of the C&D debris generated be recycled, and felt that a 50% diversion goal would be fairly easy to reach in new construction projects; however, renovation projects may have a tougher time reaching a 50% diversion goal. It was noted that haulers have provided price incentives at new construction sites to separate materials on site for the purpose of recycling the materials that have well established markets, such as concrete and metal. This representative also felt it would be beneficial for Orange County EPD to perhaps provide some form of certification process for pre processing at landfills to verify that materials are actually being pulled out and recycled rather than landfilled. 4.4 Short-List of Recommended Strategies Each of the eight strategies presented to the stakeholder group are listed in the Strategies Ranking Matrix, provided in Appendix E, which includes a numerical score given to each strategy based on nine criteria derived primarily from the stated Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals for this project, as well as discussions with County staff. The criteria also take into consideration the stakeholder feedback received and various administrative and economic considerations that have been identified as important factors. The evaluation criteria used in the matrix include: Streamline reporting process Improve tracking of generation and processing/disposal Achieve State goals for diverting C&D waste Market development Financial impact on County Financial impact on users Administrative and legal complexity Energy conservation and renewable energy Stakeholder input regarding least effective strategies Each strategy was assigned a score of one point, two points, or three points for each of the criteria depending on how well it met the identified criterion. The standards for assigning a score based on 21

30 each criterion are specifically defined within the matrix. Each of the strategies was scored relative to one another. Based on the resulting matrix scores for each of the eight potential management strategies and feedback received during the stakeholder meeting, the County and the HDR team narrowed the list of strategies down to a total of five to be further evaluated. Certain strategies were combined where appropriate, while others were identified as policies that the County should promote adoption of at the State level, but not specifically address at the County level. Finally, one strategy was removed from the list entirely, as it was determined to be redundant with one of the other strategies. The final list of strategies recommended for further evaluation include: 1. Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data. 2. Adopt a C&D diversion ordinance, require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans including a 50% diversion requirement, and educate building contractors. 3. Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials to be promoted at the state and/or regional level. 4. C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee). 5. Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers. It is anticipated that each of these strategies would assist in the further development of local end markets by creating a more consistent and reliable supply of materials. Some other common elements associated with each of these strategies include: The need for the County to coordinate with other local governments, as necessary; The need for publicly announcing timelines for implementation, and engaging in educational efforts directed toward affected parties; and General economic benefit through conserving landfill space, which indirectly preserves property tax revenue (i.e. new or larger landfills are reported to bring down property value). 5.0 Recommended Strategies Evaluation 5.1 Strategy #1: Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste and C&D debris Overview The current system of reporting for landfills and MRFs does not accurately capture the information and level of detail required to accurately define the quantity of C&D waste (including the various types of material) generated inside and outside of the County, as well as the amount of material recycled or disposed. 22

31 To effectively manage C&D waste in a manner that meets the vision, objectives and goals of this SWIRP (including State recycling requirements), it is necessary to accurately define the amount and type of waste generated, as well as the amount that is recycled and disposed. This will provide a framework for compliance monitoring, as well as baseline data to assist in the development of material processing centers/businesses. Once a reliable source of material is identified and the amount quantified, either market driven businesses can be formed to process/recycle the raw material or the County can help initiate the development of processing for an identified material. The overall C&D waste industry can be divided into 4 distinct business sectors: Generator Hauler Recycling Facility/Processing Center Disposal Site Although all of these sectors could potentially provide information to improve tracking, to develop a viable program it will be important to identify the information sources that provide the most reliable information, minimize additional workload and streamline the data gathering activities. Table 5 1 summarizes the information available for each business type, as well as possible methods for obtaining the information. Table 5 1 C&D Waste Reporting By Type of Business Business Sector Generator Hauler Information available Best position to know the amount and type of waste generated from construction. Amount of waste they handle (some waste streams they may not haul). Current Reporting Status Information not collected. Information not collected. Possible Method of Obtaining Information Building permit process requiring a waste diversion plan and documentation of the amount of material generated on site. As part of the County permitting process, require annual report with total tonnage or cubic yards hauled per year and possibly location. 23

32 Table 5 1 C&D Waste Reporting By Type of Business Business Sector Recycling Facility/Processing Center Disposal Site Information available Amount of material received for processing, and the portion recycled and disposed. Amount of material disposed. Current Reporting Status MRFs are required to report to the State, but many recyclers (i.e. concrete crushers) are not required to report. Data is very incomplete. Sites are required to report to the State. Possible Method of Obtaining Information Work with the State to improve reporting and include all recyclers; County could require a separate Annual Report with total tonnage or cubic yards of material received, recycled and disposed. Work with the State to improve reporting; County could require an enhanced Annual Report. Based on a review of Table 5 1 and input from stakeholders during the stakeholder workshop, it appears that the generator has the most information and control of the material; consequently, the generator may be the best source for information regarding C&D waste generation, recycling and disposal. If required by the County as part of the building permit process, most of this information could be obtained through waste diversion plans and associated documentation. Although the other business sectors may not have the same amount of data and control as the generator, they may also be able to provide selected information for reporting or verification of data generated. For example, periodic reporting of quantities hauled to recyclers/processing centers and to disposal sites would provide information regarding the total amount of material disposed or recycled. Comparison of the data could either identify areas of inconsistency (to focus improvement efforts) or confirm the reported data, which would increase confidence in the data. Potential areas for data collection and reporting that could improve tracking are summarized as follows: 1. Use of the building permit process and/or C&D ordinance to require contractors generating Class III and C&D materials to report the quantities diverted and disposed to the County upon completion of projects in a format approved by the County. This could require development of a more elaborate data tracking system in coordination with the building permit process. In addition, it will be important to minimize the impact on the generator, as well as the permitting process. 2. Requirement that all registered C&D waste haulers submit annual reports to the County on the amount of C&D materials collected (possibly by material type, however this 24

33 information may not be readily available to the hauler) and the destination facilities. The level of detail could be reduced (i.e. just recycled vs. disposed) to minimize the administrative burden to the haulers. 3. Improve reporting requirement that destination facilities (both recycling and disposal) report to the County annually on Class III and C&D tonnages received and origin of material. MRFs already have to report; however other recyclers like concrete crushers do not currently report their data. As this Strategy is further developed and implemented, some issues to consider include: Avoiding data/reporting duplication or the need for a company to report the same data if they operate in more than one business sector. Exceptions for types of construction that do not create meaningful amounts of C&D waste, or for projects with very limited generation. Establishing consistent units for reporting (i.e. weight) and or conversion factors for types of waste Benefits Provides a better understanding of the quantity of C&D waste (including the various types of material) generated inside and outside of the County, as well as the amount of material being generated, recycled, and disposed in the County. Establishes a framework for compliance monitoring, as well as providing baseline data for development of C&D recycling initiatives. Although this strategy does not directly address the Vision and Guiding Principles, it is a key component of many of the other strategies. Improved reporting/tracking is a key component of the Goals for this project Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Although not specifically a tracking system, Lee County, Florida, gathers data through their building permit process and diversion plans that are required for construction projects by their C&D debris diversion ordinance Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline It is anticipated that the primary implementing parties will be Orange County EPD, the Solid Waste Division, and possibly the Division of Building Safety (permitting process); however, the business reporting the data will also be involved with implementation and on going supply of data. 25

34 To implement this strategy new reporting and tracking forms, business processes and instructional information will need to be developed, as well as changes to County policy/ordinances to implement this strategy. Implementation will require close coordination and support from various Orange County Departments, including the County Attorneys Office, the Division of Building Safety, the Solid Waste Division, and EPD, as well as from the C&D businesses involved with the reporting. The timeline for implementation will depend on a number of factors, including the level of cooperation and support, as well as the time to conduct stakeholder meeting and finalize the overall program. It is anticipated that these activities could be completed within 12 to 18 months Potential Challenges During the Strategy Workshop, stakeholders were asked to identify (by voting) the strategy that would have the least benefit. This strategy received zero votes, which is an indication of general support for this strategy and its potential for increasing diversion of the Target Waste Types. While there may be some challenges associated with implementation, the stakeholders thought this strategy would be effective in increasing diversion and recycling. There are some minimal cost impacts to the County and the reporting entities for administrative work such as reporting, processing and tracking the data. Challenges include: o Minimizing the financial and workload burden associated with collecting and reporting the data both for the C&D businesses and the County. o Avoiding data duplication. To streamline the process and gain buy in to the program, it will be critical to solicit input from the affected parties Environmental Impact See Section 5.6 for planning level diversion estimates and environmental impacts Local Economic Impact It is anticipated that this strategy will not have a significant economic impact. See Section 5.6 for planning level job creation estimates Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Improved reporting and tracking is an underlying element in many of the other proposed strategies (Diversion Plans, Disposal Surcharge, and Recycling Incentive Programs) and a key component to documenting compliance with State and/or County goals. 26

35 5.2 Strategy #2: Adopt a C&D diversion ordinance, require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans including a 50% diversion requirement, and educate building contractors Overview In order to encourage diversion of C&D debris, some local governments have adopted and implemented C&D debris diversion ordinances requiring most new construction, renovation, or demolition projects to prepare diversion plans and provide documentation that a certain percentage of the C&D debris generated by the project was diverted from a landfill. Diversion of C&D debris can include options such as deconstruction (the careful disassembly of buildings components for reuse), reuse of recovered materials onsite or offsite, offsite recycling, or perhaps even waste to energy. This type of ordinance can outline the targeted diversion level in a variety of different ways, such as requiring that 50 percent of all C&D materials be diverted, or requiring that 75 percent of all inert materials (such as asphalt, brick, concrete, dirt, fines, rock, sand, soil and stone) are diverted along with 50 percent of the remaining materials. In some cases, a deposit is required to be paid at the time of permit issuance based on the size and scope of the project, with all or part of the deposit being refundable on a pro rated basis once evidence of meeting the targeted diversion level outlined in the ordinance is submitted to the local government. Alternatively, the permit holder may be required to pay a prorated non compliance fee if minimum diversion thresholds are not met during the course of the project. In either case, as local (land use) ordinance, reporting on implementation of the diversion plan or payment of a noncompliance penalty is required prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Payments such as forfeited deposits, and/or non compliance fees can be used to fund diversion programs and efforts Benefits Provides a mechanism to increase the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal to approved recycling facilities. Provides information to improve compliance monitoring, as well as reporting and tracking of material recycled in the County. Directly addresses the vision, guiding principles, and goals of the program to manage C&D waste in a sustainable manner and to help achieve the goals of increasing the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal facilities. Encourages the development of new markets for C&D materials within the County Discussion of Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Lee County, Florida, adopted a C&D diversion ordinance in County staff researched other communities that had previously adopted and implemented C&D ordinances, and based on that research, initially intended to adopt an up front deposit based ordinance like those established in Austin, TX and San Jose, CA. However, after significant outreach and 27

36 discussions with the local building industry, the County decided to adopt a post project penalty based system that they feel has worked very well for the County, with little resistance from the local building industry. It took Lee County approximately six months to write and adopt their ordinance. According to County staff, determining the enforcement mechanisms and language was the most difficult part of writing the ordinance itself. There was also some negotiation between the County and the local Builders Association regarding the types and sizes of projects that would qualify for an exemption from the ordinance requirements. There was a six month delay between the time the ordinance was adopted and the time the requirements became effective, in order to allow for education and outreach efforts which included four public workshops held at area libraries, postcards mailed to local businesses explaining the changes and announcing the workshops, and a significant amount of direct face to face outreach with those in the local building industry. Lee County s ordinance requires that all residential and commercial construction projects greater than $90,000 in value, alterations greater than $10,000 in value, and roofing projects requiring old roofing removal, divert 50% of the debris generated by the project. Projects requiring only mechanical, electrical, or plumbing are excluded from the requirement. When a new permit is applied for, County staff provides the applicant with information on the C&D diversion requirements. At the end of the project, the permit holder must provide the Building Department with gate receipts showing that C&D debris generated on the project site was delivered to an approved material recovery facility, a completed C&D Material Handling Worksheet, and a signed statement of accuracy. Appendix F contains copies of each of the forms provided/required by Lee County. The County currently has a compliance rate of percent with the diversion requirements, with the remaining noncompliant permit applicants paying a penalty for non compliance Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline It is anticipated that the primary implementing parties will be Orange County EPD, the Solid Waste Division, the Division of Building Safety (permitting process), and the County Attorney s Office. To implement this strategy, a new ordinance will need to be written and adopted, and new policies, reporting and tracking forms, business processes and instructional information will need to be developed. Implementation will require close coordination and support from various Orange County Departments, including the County Attorneys Office, the Division of Building Safety, the Solid Waste Division, and EPD. It is suggested that the implementing parties work closely with local Builders Associations throughout the implementation process to educate and receive feedback from the local industry regarding the purpose of the ordinance and how it will be implemented. The timeline for implementation will depend on a number of factors, including the level of cooperation and support among departments, time to develop and finalize the ordinance 28

37 language, time to conduct stakeholder meetings, and time to coordinate the implementation of new materials and processes needed to implement the ordinance once it is adopted. It is anticipated that these activities could take a number of years to work through. As a result, it is anticipated that implementation of this strategy will be within a 1 to 2 year time period Potential Challenges During the Strategy Workshop, stakeholders were asked to identify (by voting) the strategy that would have the least benefit. This strategy received only two votes, which is an indication of general support for this strategy and its potential for increasing diversion of the Target Waste Types. While there may be some challenges associated with implementing a C&D debris diversion ordinance, the stakeholders thought this strategy would be effective in increasing diversion and recycling. There are some minimal cost impacts to the County in terms of administrative work such as educating builders about the ordinance and its requirements, processing documentation submitted, and tracking the data. There will be some cost impacts to builders for administrative work such as developing and implementing the diversion plan for a project, tracking data and receipts for materials, and submitting the appropriate documentation. Challenges include: o Minimizing the financial and workload burden on County resources associated with educating building permit applicants and reviewing documentation data submitted. o Minimizing administrative and reporting hurdles to the extent possible for the building industry while still accomplishing the goals and intent of the ordinance. In the short term, there could be a lack of processors and end markets in the region for some common C&D materials. For this reason, the County should actively publicize the ordinance and its overall plan for C&D debris diversion and allow time for end markets and infrastructure to develop ahead of full implementation of the ordinance Environmental Impact See Section 5.6 for planning level diversion estimates and environmental impacts. By promoting increased recycling, this strategy would have a positive impact on natural resource conservation, energy conservation, and conservation of landfill space Local Economic Impact This strategy has the potential to create jobs, as sorting and recycling operations are typically more labor intensive than traditional landfill disposal. This strategy has the potential to encourage development of new recyclers/end markets by increasing the reliable supply of raw materials in the region. See Section 5.6 for planning level job creation estimates. 29

38 5.2.8 Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies Strategy 1 (streamlining and improving reporting requirements) could be a precursor to this strategy. 5.3 Strategy #3: Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials Overview Another strategy that has been effective in increasing diversion of C&D debris in other locations is the establishment of an ordinance or legislation that bans the disposal of certain types of C&D materials. This type of ordinance typically identifies materials with sufficient recycling potential (such as asphalt, brick, concrete, cardboard, and wood) and establishes maximum allowable percentages of components in loads tipped at landfills. For example, loads can contain less than a specified number of tons or a specified percentage of a particular material; otherwise it must be diverted for segregation and recycling prior to disposal. Implementation of this type of landfill ban for certain materials can be accomplished in a stepped approach, starting with a material like concrete that is already being widely recycled, then adding metals for which there are good markets, and later adding other materials for which markets are currently more limited. The intent of a ban would be to encourage the recycling or composting of banned materials and to encourage facilities to create incentives for haulers/waste producers to remove the banned /recyclable materials from the waste stream. The County could require facility operators to develop a plan showing that they will not dispose of waste that is commingled with too much of the banned substances by processing for recycling onsite or offsite. Elements to be addressed in the plan are similar to the spotting already performed for unauthorized waste: Monitoring of all incoming loads Comprehensive inspection of certain loads Response to failed loads o Notice to the sender o Records kept on failed loads greater than a certain size o Loads rejected (unless facility recycles the banned materials) o Facility may fine hauler or conversely provide incentives to prevent Facilities could have the option to either set up a recycling program for the banned materials received at their facility, or create incentives for haulers/waste generators to separate recyclables prior to delivery to the facility. Such incentives could include fines for violations, rewards for cooperation, and/or rejection of non compliant loads. Facilities that do not comply with the ban and their submitted plan could be fined by the County. In order to be effective, this type of landfill ban would need to be a cooperative effort between the County and other local municipalities, and would require State and regional support. Landfill 30

39 bans are most effective when they are implemented at a statewide level. For this reason, it is recommended that the County pursue this strategy by promoting it at the state and/or regional level Benefits Provides a mechanism to increase the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal to approved recycling facilities. This strategy directly addresses the Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals of the project to manage C&D waste in a sustainable manner and to help achieve the goals of increasing the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal facilities. Encourages the prevention of the targeted wastes through more efficient building designs, product stewardship, greener materials, and serves to promote alternative reuses and recycling. Encourages the development of new markets for C&D materials within the County, region and state Discussion of Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments Massachusetts currently has the only state wide ban on disposal of certain C&D materials. In 2006, Massachusetts began to ban C&D materials, specifically five components asphalt pavement, brick, concrete, cardboard, metal and wood. Since then, they have added clean gypsum wallboard and are looking at other materials, specifically carpet and ceiling tiles. Massachusetts law states that loads accepted for disposal cannot contain more than 20 percent by volume of the banned materials listed above. There are counties that have landfill bans on C&D materials in states such as California, Washington, and Oregon Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline Because this is something that would be best implemented at the state level, the County could begin promoting or lobbying for this strategy immediately Potential Challenges Unless this strategy is implemented on a state wide basis, there will be the tendency for a ban to drive some amount of the targeted materials to disposal facilities in neighboring counties or municipalities. During the Strategy Workshop, stakeholders were asked to identify (by voting) the strategy that would have the least potential for increasing diversion of the Target Waste Types. This strategy received 15 votes (the most of any of the eight strategies presented), which is an indication of a general lack of support for this strategy among industry stakeholders. 31

40 5.3.6 Environmental Impact See Section 5.6 for planning level diversion estimates and environmental impacts. By promoting increased recycling, this strategy would have a positive impact on natural resource conservation, energy conservation, and conservation of landfill space Local Economic Impact This strategy has the potential to increase jobs across the County, region and state as sorting and recycling operations are typically more labor intensive than traditional landfill disposal. This strategy has the potential to encourage development of new recyclers/end markets by increasing the reliable supply of raw materials in the region and state. See Section 5.6 for planning level job creation estimates Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies This strategy does not rely upon the other proposed strategies. 5.4 Strategy #4: C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) Overview Another method for encouraging greater diversion of C&D materials is to enact a surcharge for landfill disposal of C&D debris. Proceeds from such surcharges can be used to support local waste diversion and public education efforts, or to support other strategies for implementation, such as developing data gathering and reporting mechanisms (i.e. database and links to building permit applications) and diversion education efforts. A C&D disposal surcharge would be most effective as a cooperative effort with local municipalities, so as to be consistent throughout the County and pool resources for funding consistent public education efforts Benefits Provides an incentive to increase the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal to approved recycling facilities. This strategy directly addresses the Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals of the project to manage C&D waste in a sustainable manner and to help achieve the goals of increasing the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal facilities. Encourages the prevention of the targeted wastes through more efficient building designs, product stewardship, greener materials, and serves to promote alternative reuses and recycling. 32

41 Encourages the development of new markets for recycling C&D materials within the County and region by making processing more cost competitive with disposal Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments In 2000, the Wake County, NC Solid Waste Management Division (WCSWMD) developed and enacted a C&D Debris Surcharge Ordinance at the North Wake MSW Landfill and Feltonsville Transfer Station. Under this ordinance, all haulers (public and private) servicing commercial, industrial, institutional and governmental generators and disposing of solid waste at County facilities are required to pay double the tipping fee of the facility if their load contains ten percent or more C&D debris by weight or volume. The goal of the surcharge ordinance is to encourage separation and recycling of C&D materials. In Wake County, an employee inspects all loads of trash disposed at the landfill and transfer station. If an MSW load contains more than ten percent C&D debris, the employee issues the hauling company a Wake County Surcharge Violation citation and the hauler is charged double the normal tipping fee. At month s end, the landfill manager forwards copies of the C&D surcharge citations to the WCSWMD. Information that is collected from the citation includes: date of violation, issued by, facility, hauler, transaction #, permit #, tag #, truck #, time of violation, net weight, % contamination, origin of load (customer name & address) and the drivers signature. When the ordinance was implemented, the WCSWMD promoted the policy change and worked to educate haulers and businesses in the community. There was not an additional cost associated with implementing the program because inspectors were already examining loads for banned items at the landfill and transfer station. In 2008, the City of San Diego, CA also adopted a C&D surcharge for flat rate loads that is determined by multiplying the applicable standard disposal fee for general refuse by 1.5. The C&D surcharge for weighed loads (fee based on actual weight) is determined by multiplying the applicable standard disposal fee for general refuse for weighed loads by The C&D surcharge is imposed on all loads which contain 20 percent or more of C&D material delivered to the County s Miramar Landfill for disposal. Jacksonville, FL has implemented a surcharge in the form of a host fee of $7.16 on each ton of solid waste deposited or transferred in or through every solid waste disposal or management facility within Duval County whether publicly or privately owned or operated. (Sec , c. 2012) Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline It is anticipated that the primary implementing parties would be Orange County EPD, the Solid Waste Division, and the County Attorney s Office, as well as the disposal facilities. To implement this strategy, a new ordinance will need to be written and adopted, and accompanying new policies and reporting forms will likely need to be developed. The timeline for implementation will depend on a number of factors, including the level of cooperation and support among County departments, time to develop and finalize the ordinance language, time to conduct stakeholder meetings, and time to coordinate the 33

42 implementation of any new processes needed to implement the ordinance once it is adopted. It is anticipated that these activities could take a number of years to work though. As a result, it is anticipated that implementation of this strategy will be within a 2 to 3 year time period Potential Challenges There may be some resistance to the implementation of a C&D disposal surcharge among stakeholders. Depending on how the ordinance is designed and implemented, there could be some cost implications for the County and for owners of private disposal or transfer facilities within the County in terms of additional monitoring that may be required. There may also be some cost implications for haulers and residents for any loads that exceed the allowable limits as defined in the surcharge ordinance Environmental Impact See Section 5.6 for planning level diversion estimates and environmental impacts. By promoting increased recycling, this strategy would have a positive impact on natural resource conservation, energy conservation, and conservation of landfill space Local Economic Impact This strategy has the potential to increase jobs as sorting and recycling operations are typically more labor intensive than traditional landfill disposal. This strategy has the potential to encourage development of new recyclers/end markets by increasing the reliable supply of input materials in the region. Funding generated from this strategy could be used for economic development for these recycling end markets. It may be possible to provide economic incentive grant programs to assist in developing end markets. See Section 5.6 for planning level job creation estimates Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies A disposal surcharge could be a potential source of revenue for other strategies and general education efforts related to recycling and diversion of Target Waste Types. 5.5 Strategy #5: Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers Overview C&D waste haulers are in a competitive business; consequently, they typically deliver C&D waste to the closest and/or least expensive facility, without consideration for materials recycling. There are instances when a hauler will deliver waste to a recycler. These instances are usually based on a 34

43 client requiring recycling and paying a higher fee for the service. There may also be instances of vertical integration within the market, in which haulers also operate destination facilities. Under the current C&D generation/recycling/disposal system, unless additional incentives are provided or the economics are changed to favor recycling, the lowest cost option will typically be selected (usually disposal in Central Florida). By establishing a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers, this strategy would encourage the haulers to divert C&D waste from disposal sites to recyclers; thereby increasing the amount C&D waste recycled. In addition to assisting to achieve the State goals, this strategy could improve tracking and reporting, increase the supply of raw material for recyclers and indirectly assist in encouraging the development of recyclers/end markets. Many of the strategies (including this strategy) that help meet the vision, objectives, and goals of the SWIRP (including State recycling requirements) have a financial/funding component to address, as well as overall implementation considerations. As this strategy is further developed and implemented, some funding and implementation issues to consider include the following. It is envisioned that this program would be voluntary and partly market driven as haulers would be able to decide to participate and empowered to select the disposal/recycling facilities. The overall program could be accomplished through partial tipping fee rebates to haulers or contractors for the delivery of C&D material to recycling facilities. Under such a program, the amount of recyclables delivered to recycling facilities would need to be documented and communicated to the County to justify the rebates. This approach would require periodic (possibly annual) reporting on the part of the haulers and record keeping/tracking by Orange County. It may be necessary to establish exceptions for types of construction that do not create meaningful amounts of recyclable C&D waste, or for projects that generate a limited amount of waste. It will be important to determine the value of the incentive that would be required to be effective (i.e. offset additional fuel costs, reporting, and disposal tipping fees). Since funding would be required, it will be necessary to identify potential sources of funding, including diversion plan fees or a C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) Benefits Provides an incentive to increase the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal to approved recycling facilities. Could be preferable to a landfill ban or strict diversion requirement, as it provides haulers with a choice rather than mandating a particular action. Provides information to improve compliance monitoring, as well as reporting and tracking of material recycled in the County. 35

44 Directly addresses the vision, guiding principles, and goals of the program to manage C&D waste in a sustainable manner and to help achieve the goals of increasing the amount of C&D waste diverted from disposal facilities Similar Programs/Policies in Other Local Governments It appears that incentive programs are typically designed as overall waste diversion programs and are not usually specific to only haulers. In addition, hauler incentive programs would be more applicable to franchise type programs where significant fees are paid to the haulers. For instance, Unincorporated Monterey, California had an incentive program that provided for increased payment if a hauler exceeded their preset minimum diversion requirements, or reduced payments if the diversion requirement was not met. Due to complexity of the program and the difficulty in projecting/managing available funds (from reduced payments) verses additional funding requirements (incentive payments), the County ended the program a few years ago. They have moved to a program that has a reduced fee to the generator for providing clean recycle material for pick up Suggested Implementation Process and Timeline It is anticipated that the primary implementing party will be the Orange County Solid Waste Division and the C&D waste haulers. To implement this strategy, it will be important to identify the level of incentive that is appropriate (and motivating), as well as the funding source. Implementation will require close coordination and support from Orange County Administration, the County Attorney s Office, and EPD, as well as from the C&D haulers. The timeline for implementation will depend on a number of factors, including the level of cooperation and support, as well as the time to conduct stakeholder meeting, develop funding sources and finalize the overall program. It is anticipated that these activities could take a number of years to work through. As a result, it is anticipated that implementation of this strategy will be within a 3 to 5 year time period Potential Challenges Challenges include: o Identifying funding sources and minimizing the financial burden on these resources. o Minimizing the workload burden associated with collecting and reporting the data both for the C&D haulers and the County. There are some fairly minimal cost impacts to the County and haulers for administrative work such as reporting, processing, and tracking the data. This strategy may be more complicated than other strategies and difficult to monitor and control; consequently, as the program develops this strategy may be refined or incorporated into other strategies. Many times the hauler does not have control over the material that is placed into containers or if the generator will source separate. 36

45 To implement this strategy and gain buy in to the program, it will be critical to solicit input from the affected parties Environmental Impact It is anticipated that this strategy will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the amount of C&D disposed. By promoting increased recycling, this strategy would have a positive impact on natural resource conservation, energy conservation, and conservation of landfill space. See Section 5.6 for planning level diversion estimates and environmental impacts Local Economic Impact It is anticipated that this strategy will not have a significant economic impact; however, it is difficult to assess the full impact until funding sources are identified. This strategy has the potential to increase jobs as segregation and recycling operations are typically more labor intensive than traditional landfill disposal. Depending on funding, there is the potential for some negative impacts if waste is diverted out of county due to costs and record keeping. It is anticipated that funding for this strategy would result in increased fees Potentially, increasing the reliable supply of input materials for recyclers could assist in encouraging the development of recyclers/end markets See Section 5.6 for planning level job creation estimates Relationship to Other Proposed Strategies This strategy could be accomplished in addition to Strategy #2 to go beyond the 50% recycling requirement, but could also be implemented independently. Since implementation of this strategy could be accomplished through the existing C&D hauler licensing process (which could also collect reporting data), this strategy is also related to improved reporting. 5.6 Planning Level Diversion Estimates and Impacts Planning Level Diversion Estimates In order to provide planning level estimates of the amount of additional diversion that could be attained through implementation of each of the recommended strategies, HDR developed the following table with input from County staff. Table 5 2 presents the estimated tonnage of the Target Waste Types that are projected to be generated, diverted and disposed in 2020, based on the status quo scenario versus implementation of the five individual recommended strategies. 37

46 Table 5 2 Estimated Tonnage of Target Waste Type Generated, Diverted & Disposed, 2020 Estimated Percent Diverted Projected Class III & C&D Tonnage (2020) Status Quo By Strategy Total Generated Diverted Disposed Status Quo 28% 28% 1,221, , ,552 Strategy 1 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Strategy 2 28% 22% 50% 1,221, , ,800 Strategy 3 28% 10% 38% 1,221, , ,392 Strategy 4 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Strategy 5 28% 2% 30% 1,221, , ,120 Based on the most recent Orange County Landfill and County wide Class III/C&D tonnage projections, as discussed in Section 2.1 above, the total amount of Target Waste projected to be generated within the County in 2020 is 1,221,600 tons. For this analysis, it is assumed that the current diversion rate for the Target Waste Types in Orange County is 28 percent 2 and that the diversion rate will remain at that level in 2020 if no new programs or policies related to Class III waste and C&D debris are implemented. For modeling purposes, certain assumptions were made regarding the potential impacts of each of the strategies. Implementation of Strategy 1, to improve reporting, is assumed to have a minimal impact (estimated at 2 percent) due to increased awareness with the reporting program. Implementation of Strategy 2, adopt a C&D recycling ordinance, is projected to have the greatest impact of the five strategies by diverting an additional 22 percent of the Class III waste and C&D debris generated in 2020, for a total diversion of 50 percent of the Target Waste Types. Implementation of Strategy 3, a landfill ban, is estimated to increase diversion by an additional 10 percent for a total of 38 percent by Implementation of Strategies 4 (C&D disposal surcharge) and 5 (C&D recycling incentive program) without other changes in the industry are assumed to have minimal impacts on diversion, as tipping fees are relatively low; therefore a surcharge and/or incentives would have to be set at an aggressively high amount to have a greater impact. However, either or both of these strategies may be more effective if other aspects of the industry change (e.g. tipping fee increase at all disposal facilities, wider availability of recycling opportunities/better markets). It should also be noted that these strategies primarily focus on C&D debris, and the portion of Class III waste that is not C&D debris may not be reduced in similar proportions Environmental Impacts - EPA WARM Results HDR used the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA) Waste Reduction Model (WARM) to estimate the environmental impacts of carbon emissions for the five recommended strategies. The 2 Based on the 2010 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Solid Waste Management Annual Report, Table 5B 1 Total Tons of MSW Materials Collected and Recycled in Florida By Descending Population Rank. 1.pdf 38

47 WARM Model is a tool that was developed to help solid waste planners and organizations track and voluntarily report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions from different waste management practices. The model calculates and totals GHG emissions resulting from baseline and alternative waste management practices (i.e. source reduction, recycling, combustion, composting, and landfilling). Table 5 3 shows the effects of the strategies for plan year As shown in Table 5 3, the WARM model estimates the carbon emissions and emission offsets produced throughout the lifecycle of the material based on a baseline scenario (no new programs) versus alternative scenarios for the tons of materials managed in In order to use the WARM model, it was necessary to make assumptions about how much waste would be recycled versus composted. Based on the previous State goal of composting a minimum of 5% of material generated (later stricken in HB7243), it was assumed for modeling purposes that 95% of the material will be recycled and 5% of the material will be composted. The tons anticipated to be diverted for recycling in each scenario were allocated equally across six material types in the WARM Model. They included: corrugated cardboard, dimensional lumber, concrete, asphalt, asphalt shingles, and drywall. Table 5 3 summarizes the results from the WARM model. Table 5 3 Effect on Carbon Emissions (Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, MTCO2E) Additional Reduction Due to Recycling Additional Reduction Due to Composting Combined Reduction from Strategy Total Emissions Status Quo N/A N/A N/A (52,948) Strategy 1 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Strategy 2 (319,998) (5,366) (325,364) (378,312) Strategy 3 (145,455) (2,439) (147,894) (200,842) Strategy 4 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Strategy 5 (29,088) (488) (29,576) (82,524) Carbon emissions shown in Table 5 3 represent emissions effects generated throughout the life of the materials handled including: extraction and processing of raw materials; manufacture of products; transportation of materials and products to markets; use by consumers; and end of life management. End of life management includes factors such as: transportation to an appropriate facility for disposal or processing; use of equipment during disposal or processing; and landfill carbon storage. As shown in Table 5 3, implementation of Strategy 2 has the greatest impact on emissions, with a total estimated carbon emission reduction of 378,312 metric tons. The Status Quo scenario has the least effect on carbon emissions, as it assumes that diversion of the Target Waste Types remains at the currently assumed 28 percent diversion rate. At this diversion rate, overall carbon emissions remain at 52,948 metric tons avoided. 39

48 5.6.3 Planning Level Job Creation Estimates By increasing diversion of the Target Waste Types, there is also the potential for the creation of jobs associated with the processing of the additional diverted materials. Table 5 4 provides planning level estimates of the number of jobs that could be created as a result of the projected increase in diversion of the Target Waste Types associated with each of the five recommended strategies. Based on a study by the Institute for Local Self Reliance, which analyzed the economic impacts of recycling, an average of 3.62 processing jobs are created for each additional 10,000 tons of C&D debris diverted per year. Based on that assumption, Strategy 2 is projected to have the greatest impact on job creation, with a total of 97 additional processing jobs created to handle the amount of material projected to be diverted in Table 5 4 Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion As Compared to the Status Quo [1] Processing Jobs/10,000 TPY [1] Projected Tons Diverted (2020) Potential Processing Jobs Created Due to Increased Diversion Status Quo ,832 N/A Strategy ,264 9 Strategy , Strategy , Strategy ,264 9 Strategy ,264 9 Total: 168 [1] Based on "Recycling Economic Development through Scrap Based Manufacturing" (Michael Lewis, 1994), Institute for Local Self Reliance Assumptions; 3.62 is the average number of processing jobs per 10,000 TPY for the Mixed C&D, Lumber, and Other C&D categories. 6.0 Implementation Schedule Table 6 1 presents a suggested implementation schedule for the five recommended strategies for increasing diversion of the Target Waste Types in Orange County. 40

49 Table 6 1 Implementation Schedule Strategy 1: Improve Reporting Requirements Determine implementing parties, processes and forms Implement reporting requirements and conduct outreach and education Strategy 2: Adopt C&D Diversion Ordinance Develop and adopt ordinance (include phase in of diversion requirement) and conduct stakeholder outreach Develop policies, reporting mechanisms, processes and educational information needed to implement the ordinance Implement ordinance requirements Strategy 3: Landfill Material Ban Promote adoption of a ban on certain C&D materials at the State and/or Regional level Strategy 4: C&D Disposal Surcharge Develop and adopt ordinance Develop policies, reporting mechanisms, processes and educational information needed to implement the ordinance Implement ordinance requirements Strategy 5: C&D Recycling Hauler Incentive Program Determine level of incentive, funding source(s), business processes and requirements Conduct stakeholder outreach and implement program Year Implementation of Strategy 1 Improving Reporting Requirements, can begin immediately with internal discussions among County staff regarding the parties, processes, reporting forms and mechanisms that will need to be identified or developed in order to implement improved reporting by waste haulers and facilities that are not currently subject to reporting requirements. Improved reporting requirements for generators will be addressed with the implementation of Strategy 2. It is expected that by the end of 2014, new reporting processes and requirements for haulers and facilities could be in place. Implementation of Strategy 2 Adopt C&D Diversion Ordinance, would be expected to begin in 2013 with the drafting and adoption of an ordinance and initial stakeholder outreach efforts. Once the ordinance has been adopted, time will be needed for County staff to determine exactly how the ordinance requirements will be implemented and enforced, and to make any changes needed to internal processes in order to accommodate implementation. It is anticipated that this process could take a year or more following adoption of the ordinance. It is also recommended that diversion and reporting requirements associated with the ordinance be phased in over a period of time with full implementation of the ordinance and its requirements occurring in Implementation of Strategy 3 Landfill Ban, can also begin immediately. County staff can begin advocating for a landfill ban on certain types of C&D materials at the State and possibly regional level. Promotion of this strategy as a method for helping Orange County 41

50 and other Florida counties to achieve higher C&D diversion goals would be expected to continue for as long as necessary throughout the ten year planning period. Implementation of Strategy 4 C&D Disposal Surcharge, would begin in 2013, along with implementation of the C&D diversion ordinance. If a landfill ban on any of the targeted materials has been enacted at the State or regional level prior to this time, the County s surcharge could be used to encourage increased diversion of additional C&D materials not covered by the landfill ban. If a landfill ban has not yet been enacted, the County can utilize the disposal surcharge as a mechanism to increase diversion of those materials that would likely have been targeted by a landfill ban. Implementation of a C&D disposal surcharge would be expected to take approximately two years, with the strategy being fully implemented in Implementation of Strategy 5 C&D Recycling Incentive Program, would be the last of the recommended strategies to be implemented. This is due in large part to the fact that a reliable funding source will need to be identified and in place to support the incentive program. It is anticipated that revenues generated as a result of Strategies 2 and 4 will serve as the primary funding sources for the incentive program, and therefore will need to be implemented prior to Strategy 5. However, if an alternative funding source is identified, this strategy could be implemented earlier. Implementation of the incentive program is expected to take approximately two years, with the program in full operation by Future Recommendations After the County has further evaluated and began implementation of the recommended strategies presented herein, the County should give consideration to expanding the SWIRP to a Phase II that incorporates additional solid waste streams, such as Class I waste from commercial and/or residential entities. 42

51 Appendix A: Summary of Current Situation Report

52 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

53 ORANGE COUNTY SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN SUMMARY OF CURRENT SITUATION Prepared for: Orange County Environmental Protection Division Prepared by: March 2011

54 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Table of Contents 1. Introduction Definitions Waste Generation Target Waste Types Historical Data and Projections Current Framework and Management Practices Regulatory and Policy Considerations Existing Regulatory Considerations State 75% Recycling Goal Orange to Green County Comprehensive Plan Collection Transfer Processing/Disposal End Markets Summary of Findings List of Figures Figure 3-1 Orange County Landfill Class III Waste (FY 1995/96 to 2009/10)... 4 Figure 8-1 Location of Processing and Disposal Facilities Figure 8-2 Typical Distribution of Recycled Material West Orange Environmental List of Tables Table 3-1 Examples of Target Waste Types... 3 Table 3-2 Orange County Landfill and County-Wide Class III/C&D Projections (ton/yr)... 5 Table 4-1 Summary of Entities Documented... 6 Table 6-1 Commercial Haulers and Demolition Companies Table 8-1 Class III and C&D Disposal and Processing Facilities Table 8-2 Origin of Waste at Pine Ridge and Vista Landfills Page Page Page HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

55 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Table 8-3 Pine Ridge Recycling Data (2010) Table 9-1 Typical New Products and Uses for Recycled Material Table 9-2 Partial List of End-Product C&D Recycle Companies in Central Florida Table 9-3 Typical Bulk Density and Material Pricing (2010) Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

56 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation 1. Introduction HDR Engineering, Inc. ( HDR ) was retained by Orange County ( County ) to assist with the development of a Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP). The SWIRP will serve as a strategic planning tool for the management of Class III and Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris solid waste (target waste types) that is generated within or transported into the County. As a subconsultant to HDR, EPIC Engineering & Consulting Group, LLC ( EPIC ) is responsible for documenting the current situation and system framework regarding generation and management of the target waste types. This report presents the investigations and findings regarding the current situation and system framework. The management of solid waste typically incorporates methods to collect, transfer, reduce volume, recycle and reuse materials, and dispose of residual waste. This project addresses management of Class III and Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris solid waste ( target waste types ) in Orange County. The overall goal of this project is to develop a Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP) that will address management of these materials in a sustainable manner (including short-term and long-term planning) to minimize costs to the community and adverse impacts to the quality of life within the community, and maximize potential benefits such as economic development. Understanding the current situation regarding waste generation and current management of these materials provides a framework for developing the SWIRP. As a result, this report documents the following information related to the target waste types: 1. Waste generation (historical and future trends), including projections for future rates of generation of these wastes. 2. Inventory of solid waste management facilities within Orange County. 3. Current management practices regarding collection, transfer, processing/disposal and end markets, as well as trends regarding source separation, reuse, recycling, conversion to energy, and disposal. 2. Definitions The following terms and definitions may be useful for references to terms used in this report. The terms and definitions are as provided in Florida Administrative Code (FAC) Chapter , and can be found at the following website: (14) Class III waste means yard trash, construction and demolition debris, processed tires, asbestos, carpet, cardboard, paper, glass, plastic, furniture other than appliances, or other materials approved by the Department, that are not expected to produce leachate that poses a threat to public health or the environment. (15) Clean debris means any solid waste that is virtually inert, is not a pollution threat to ground water or surface waters, is not a fire hazard, and is likely to retain its physical and HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 1 EPIC

57 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation chemical structure under expected conditions of disposal or use. The term includes brick, glass, ceramics, and uncontaminated concrete including embedded pipe or steel. (24) Construction and demolition debris means discarded materials generally considered to be not water soluble and non-hazardous in nature, including but not limited to steel, glass, brick, concrete, asphalt material, pipe, gypsum wallboard, and lumber, from the construction or destruction of a structure as part of a construction or demolition project or from the renovation of a structure, including such debris from construction of structures at a site remote from the construction or demolition project site. The term includes rocks, soils, tree remains, trees, and other vegetative matter that normally results from land clearing or land development operations for a construction project; clean cardboard, paper, plastic, wood, and metal scraps from a construction project; except as provided in Section (9)(j), F.S., yard trash and unpainted, non-treated wood scraps from sources other than construction or demolition projects; scrap from manufacturing facilities that is the type of material generally used in construction projects and that would meet the definition of construction and demolition debris if it were generated as part of a construction or demolition project, including debris from the construction of manufactured homes and scrap shingles, wallboard, siding concrete, and similar materials from industrial or commercial facilities and de minimis amounts of other non-hazardous wastes that are generated at construction or demolition projects, provided such amounts are consistent with best management practices of the construction and demolition industries. Mixing of construction and demolition debris with other types of solid waste will cause it to be classified as other than construction and demolition debris. 3. Waste Generation The first step in documenting the current condition is to identify the source and type of waste (i.e. target waste types) and the amount of material expected to be generated. This section uses available data from previous studies to show historical and projected target waste disposed in Orange County as well as waste generation projections for the target waste types Target Waste Types Landscaping and clearing, new construction, demolition and remodeling/renovation activities are the primary sources of C&D and Class III waste. Based on information from the US EPA report titled ESTIMATING 2003 BUILDING-RELATED CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION MATERIALS AMOUNTS, the estimated amount of building-related C&D materials generated in the U.S. during 2003 are sourced from the following generators: Demolition 49% Renovation 42% Construction 9% In an FDEP report titled 75% Recycling Goal Report to the Legislature, delivered in January of 2010, it is stated that according to the county recycling reports submitted to the DEP for 2007: 6.1 million tons of C&D was disposed in Florida s 75 C&D disposal sites. C&D constitutes 25% of Florida s MSW waste stream or 8.2 million tons. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 2 EPIC

58 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Currently only 27% or 2.1 million tons of Florida s C&D is recycled. Although vegetative debris is part of the waste stream, it has a fairly well developed management and recycling infrastructure and market. As a result, it will be included in some parts of the discussion; however, the focus of the investigations will be on C&D type waste streams. In addition, other specialty wastes, such as tires and waste oil that already have well defined recycling programs will not be included in the investigations. Based on the activities defined above, significant examples of target waste types for this project are listed in Table 3-1. Table 3-1 Examples of Target Waste Types Asphalt Brick Concrete Metals Dirt Dimensional lumber Plastic Pipe Ceiling tiles Insulation Cardboard Roofing Material Carpeting Dry Wall Fixtures 3.2. Historical Data and Projections The primary sources of information for historical waste generation and projections were the Orange County Solid Waste Division and the Final Report Solid Waste Master Plan, Orange County Solid Waste Division (SCS Engineers, January 30, 2009). Historical Class III and C&D information is available for the Orange County Landfill. As shown on Figure 3-1, waste generation increased dramatically between 2002 and 2005, and sustained elevated levels through 2008; however, the current generation rate is similar to the generation rate in the late 1990 s. It should be noted that in late 2004 and early 2005, central Florida was hit by three hurricanes generating large amounts of disaster debris, which impacted the Class III waste tonnage shown in Figure 3-1 below. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 3 EPIC

59 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Figure 3-1 Orange County Landfill Class III Waste (FY 1995/96 to 2009/10) 700,000 Yard Waste 600,000 Class III 500,000 Waste, cy 400, , , ,000 0 Fiscal Year As part of the Solid Waste Master Plan (referenced above), Class III and C&D waste projections were developed for the Orange County Landfill and County-Wide. Although the final master plan document is dated 2009, the projections were developed in As a result, the projections were influenced by the significantly higher waste generation data and increasing trends observed at that time. Current Class III and C&D waste disposal and processing is significantly lower than the amount projected for both the Orange County Landfill and County-Wide. Information regarding Class III waste is readily available for the Orange County Landfill; consequently, it was used as a basis for further analysis and adjustment of the County-Wide data. The actual amount of Class III waste entering the Orange County Landfill in 2010 was approximately 45% lower than the amount projected in This factor was applied to County- Wide waste amounts to estimate current County-Wide waste disposal rates. The most recent Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) medium growth rate projections for Orange County were then used to project County-Wide generation through the planning period. Table 2-2 summarizes the projections through 2050 (both Orange County Landfill and County- Wide), and presents an adjusted projection, as well as a mid-point projection (between the 2003 projection and adjusted projection). HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 4 EPIC

60 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Table 3-2 Orange County Landfill and County-Wide Class III/C&D Projections (ton/yr) Orange County Landfill Class III Disposal Annual Projected Growth Rate from Prior Year Actual Projected Period, % County-Wide Class III and C&D Generation Projected in 2003 Adjusted Projection Mid-Point Between 2003 and Adjusted , , , ,255, , , % 1,268, , , , , , , % 1,413, , , % 1,693, ,900 1,221, , % 1,955, ,300 1,412, , % 2,246, ,800 1,623, , % 2,524,302 1,123,600 1,824,000 Notes: 1. Final Report Solid Waste Master Plan, Orange County Solid Waste Division (SCS Engineers, January 30, 2009) 2. The difference between OCL 2010 projected and actual is 45%. This was used to adjust County-Wide projections; then the most recent BEBR medium growth rates for Orange County were used to project generation through the planning period. The most recent growth rates are very similar to the growth rates used for the 2003 projections. It should be noted that because of the available housing capacity in the County, current and short term projected housing generated waste may not necessarily track with population. 3. Average annual growth rate (2003 to 2050) is 1.8%. 4. Table 3-2 presents County-Wide waste generation. Based on information from processing/disposal facilities (See Section 7), it is estimated that in ,000 to 1,000,000 tons of Class III and C&D waste were processed at facilities in Orange County. It is difficult to accurately report County-Wide amounts due to lack of available data and inconsistency of data reporting (i.e. some facilities accept waste in cubic yards and some in tons). As development and economic conditions return to a more typical pattern, waste generation is expected to increase as shown in Table 3-2, with the actual amount predicted to be somewhere between the projected and adjusted values. 4. Current Framework and Management Practices Solid waste management (including recycling) can be divided into four major steps: collection, transfer, processing/disposal and end markets for recycled material. Since these steps are carried out by different industries, multiple information sources were used to develop an inventory of the various collection businesses, management facilities and end market recyclers. The information and sources included: HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 5 EPIC

61 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Permitted commercial haulers from the Orange County Solid Waste Division. Facility information from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Solid Waste Facility Database. Facility and other information from the Orange County Environmental Protection Division (OCEPD). Input from local haulers and facility operators. Using these sources, an inventory was developed including location and contact information for waste haulers, demolition companies, and solid waste facilities. The entities were contacted and requested to supply general information related to their current business practices, including type and estimated quantities of material handled, recycling efforts, and interest in participating in the development of an integrated resource plan for C&D waste in Orange County. If interested in participating, contact information was obtained, including an address for notification of upcoming workshops and dissemination of materials/information. An inventory of entities, including contact information for those interested in further participation in the development of an integrated resource plan, is provided Attachment A. Table 4-1 provides a summary of the number of and types of these entities that were documented as part of this project. Table 4-1 Summary of Entities Documented Entity Type Number of Entities Documented. Haulers 30 Demolition Companies 4 Disposal Facilities 7 Processing Facilities Regulatory and Policy Considerations 5.1. Existing Regulatory Considerations The County regulates haulers of C&D material through a permitting process described in Orange County's Code of Ordinances, Chapter 32 Solid Waste, Article IV Collection and Disposal. Construction and demolition debris may be disposed of in a permitted landfill. Chapter of the Florida Administrative Code (FAC) establishes the standards for the construction, operation, and closure of solid waste management facilities to minimize their threat to the public health and the environment. This also includes reporting requirements. On January 6, 2010, Chapter of the FAC was amended. In general, the amendments clarified, deleted, or expanded the requirements for the design, permitting, construction, and operation of solid waste management facilities. Some of the significant changes noted in the rule amendment are related to the following: handling of chromate copper arsenate (CCA) wood defining recovered screened material (RSM); emergency preparedness and response is addressed in the operations plan; the permitted footprint can extend beyond the area needed for disposal HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 6 EPIC

62 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation during a 5-year permit period; and the liner requirements for Class III landfills, as summarized below. The amended rules specifically address CCA treated wood and requires that is shall not be incorporated into compost or made into mulch, decorative landscape chips or any other wood product that is applied as a ground cover, soil or soil amendment. The rules also includes how the CCA treated wood may be used, including ground and used as initial cover on interior slopes of lined solid waste disposal facilities. The CCA treated wood shall not be disposed of through open burning or through combustion in an air curtain incinerator. The definition of clean wood indicates that the presence of CCA treated wood would preclude wood waste from being classified as clean wood. RSM was defined in the amended rules, and is the fines fraction (i.e., soil and other small materials) derived from the processing or recycling of construction and demolition debris which passes through a final screen size no greater than ¾ of an inch. The liner system required for a Class III landfill are now prescribed in Chapter of the FAC and shall consist of a single 60-mil minimum average thickness high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane. The HDPE geomembrane in the sumps and leachate collection trenches shall be underlain with a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) or compacted clay liner. A primary leachate collection and removal system shall be installed above the HDPE geomembrane liner. Applicants may still request an exemption for the liner requirements State 75% Recycling Goal House Bill 7135, the 2008 Energy and Economic Development legislation, was signed into law in June of This bill created Section , Florida Statutes. The legislation included a State recycling goal of 75% by 2020, and directed the FDEP to develop a plan for achieving the goal. After a series of public workshops, FDEP finalized the plan to achieve this aggressive goal, and provided it to the State Legislature in January of According to FDEP s report titled 75% Recycling Goal Report to the Legislature, at least 12% of the 75% goal can be achieved by recycling C&D debris currently being disposed. In the report, FDEP recommended requiring all mixed loads of C&D to be processed at a materials recovery facility prior to disposal, and adding sorting operations at the front end of existing C&D disposal facilities. Sorting C&D should make it more cost-effective to recycle materials than dispose of them. The State Legislature eventually adopted an amended House Bill 7243 (HB 7243) in late April 2010, which resulted from compromises between House Bill 1559 and Senate Bill 570. House Bill 7243 was signed into law, and amends several chapters in Florida Statute which took affect July 1, The Bill includes the following milestones for reaching the recycling goal: 40% by % by % by % by % by 2020 HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 7 EPIC

63 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation In order to assist counties in attaining the goals shown above, the Legislature finds that the recycling of construction and demolition debris fulfills an important state interest. Therefore, HB7243 requires each county to implement a program for recycling C&D waste. To the extent economically feasible, all C&D waste must be processed prior to disposal, either at a permitted MRF or at a permitted disposal facility. The amount of C&D waste processed and recycled prior to disposal at a permitted disposal facility must be reported to FDEP and to the County on an annual basis. Another change involves a presumption that C&D would require a liner, though the applicant can request exemption from the liner requirement. If this requirement makes its way into FAC, it may make disposal of C&D more expensive and recycling more attractive. FDEP began the rulemaking process in September of 2010 with a workshop in order to get feedback on amending the FAC to reflect the new law; however, the new Governor of Florida has suspended all rulemaking activities until an Office of Fiscal Accountability and Regulatory Reform can be established. C&D issues and how the material can be counted toward the recycling goal were topics of discussion at the workshop Orange to Green In September 2005, Orange County Mayor Richard T. Crotty launched an initiative to promote energy efficiency and to register to become a Florida Green Local Government by Additionally, a goal was set to reduce petroleum consumption in Orange County by 20% over the next five years. In July 2007, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a Resolution to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions. Orange County is setting the following targets for its Climate Change Plan. The reductions are based on 2005 GHG emissions. 15% reduction by % reduction by % reduction by 2020 Two objectives under the Orange County Climate Change Plan Goal #5, Adopt Policies to Support Recycling, Methane Recovery & Biomass Energy are related to the efforts of the project: Objective G (Increase existing recycling goals for private landfills) and Objective H (Help establish local markets for recycled construction materials) Further, the Orange County Climate Change Plan Goal #7 is to Adopt Policies to Support Green Buildings County Comprehensive Plan The County s Comprehensive Plan 2010 through 2030, Goals, Objectives and Policies adopted May of 2009 and amended through June of 2010 include some noteworthy objectives and policies. The Conservation Element of the Plan includes objective OBJ C1.10, which states Orange County shall conserve energy resources for future generations. This objective shall be made measurable by implementing the following policies. And policy C states Orange HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 8 EPIC

64 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation County shall investigate and implement alternative means of reducing the County's solid waste and dependency on fossil fuels. The Solid Waste Element includes the following relevant objectives and related policies: OBJ SW1.1 Orange County shall provide adequate solid waste disposal facilities and capacity to accommodate existing and future demands by implementing the following policies. o SW The County shall encourage and support the permitting of Class III or Construction and Demolition landfills over a wide geographic area to best serve the public and support the efforts of the waste management industry to provide waste management services in a timely, economically efficient manner and to preserve capacity at the Orange County Landfill. (Added 12/00, Ord ) OBJ SW1.2 Orange County shall continue to implement alternate means of solid waste management to reduce landfill disposal. o SW1.2.2 Orange County shall continue to promote private sector participation in resource recovery systems to the extent feasible. o SW1.2.6 Orange County shall seek to establish interlocal agreements with the local governments in the County to promote coordinated recycling efforts. (Added 12/00, Ord ) o SW1.2.7 Orange County shall support the establishment of a wallboard recycling facility and discourage the land filling of wallboard from private and public disposal facilities. (Added 12/00, Ord ) OBJ SW1.4 Orange County shall require that landfill activities be operated in an environmentally sound manner for existing and future landfills that are operated and maintained by Orange County. This objective shall be made measurable by the following policies. (Added 12/00, Ord ) OBJ SW1.5 Orange County shall continue to require that all existing and future privately owned solid waste management activities be operated in an environmentally sound manner. This objective shall be made measurable by the following policies. (Added 12/00, Ord ) 6. Collection Collection and transportation of target waste is provided by commercial haulers, as well as demolition companies and other private entities. Based on information from Orange County Solid Waste Division, approximately 60 to 70% of the Class III waste is from account holders (which are generally the licensed commercial haulers) with the remainder from homeowners and other private construction or hauling companies. Licensed commercial haulers and other entities identified by OCEPD (such as large demolition contractors) were contacted and requested to provide the following type of information: Type of business and waste generation/collection activities Amount collected and transported Type of projects, including source separated waste and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 9 EPIC

65 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Type of material recycled and estimated amount of recycled materials Disposal or transfer of material Table 6-1 summarizes the information obtained and general findings are summarized as follows: Based on the information in Table 6-1, it appears that an average recycling rate is 15 to 20%. Many hauling companies provide recycling by hauling source-separated material directly to processors ( end market recyclers ) or material directly to a MRF for customer requested LEED certification. Demolition companies provide a higher level of recycling (approximately 30 to 50%) to maximize project profit. Concrete, cardboard and metal appear to be the most commonly and easily recycled materials. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 10 EPIC

66 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Estimated C&D Waste, cy/yr [1] Table 6-1 Commercial Haulers and Demolition Companies Estimated % Recycled [1] Cardboard Concrete HDPE/PCV Metal Wood Comment Company Advanced Disposal of Central FL, LLC 4,000 5% X American Waste Management, DBA: Eye Can 24,000 5% X X X Bob Randolph Trucking & Loader Services No Response Clean concrete waste generated from primary business (concrete cutting). Cat & I, Inc. N/A 50% X Central Environmental Demolition for OC and Orlando; Services N/A N/A X X Plans for C&D MRF Central Rock & Supply 13,000 0% Mainly roofing, no recycling Clean Site Services, Inc. 15,000 25% X X Container Rental LEED to GEL; Also fluorescent bulbs Customer separated or LEED recycled; mixed landfilled Co., Inc. N/A 10% X Debris & Roll-Off Services N/A N/A Mostly green waste DisposAll, Inc. 70,000 5% X X X Waste to WSI and Taft Recycling Global Rental Dumpsters, Inc. 3,000 5% X Home Builders Services of Florida, Inc. N/A N/A X X Landfilled if not customer separated HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 11 EPIC

67 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Estimated C&D Waste, cy/yr [1] Estimated % Recycled [1] Cardboard Concrete HDPE/PCV Metal Wood Comment Company Keller Outdoor, Inc. 40,000 20% X X Concrete to West Orange One Waste Services, Inc Purchased by WM; No Response PCM Construction Services, LLC No Response Pece Of Mind Disposal, Inc. 25,000 50% X X Demolition company; hauling own material only Pro Dump Services, LLC 2,000 15% X X X PVC to company in Lakeland Republic Services 60,000 30% X X X Source separate and to MRF; large cardboard customer Rhino Can, Inc. Not in business per EPD SP Recycling Corp., DBA: Aggressive Hauling 5,000 10% X X Primarily waste paper; some C&D Sunshine Recycling, Inc. 10,000 5% X X To GEL if requested TEC Diversified 5,000 10% No LEED (too much paperwork) Some C&D, but mainly street USA Services of Florida, Inc. N/A N/A sweeping; screened dirt as fill. No recycling. Veolia ES Environmental Services, Inc. Requested information not available Waste Management of Orlando See Section 7 for processing and disposal facilities Waste Pro of Florida 50,000 2% X Concrete and small amount of LEED HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 12 EPIC

68 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Estimated C&D Waste, cy/yr [1] Estimated % Recycled [1] Cardboard Concrete HDPE/PCV Metal Wood Comment Company Waste Runners, LLC (formerly Advance Waste ) Commercial Class I only; no C&D Waste Services of Florida, Inc. No Response Waste Depot LLC DBA: Waste Works 2,500 10% X X X X New operation with plans to increase to 10,000 /yr; Also American Recycling MRF Weeks & Weeks Waste Services, Inc. DBA: Central Florida Dumpsters 3,000 5% X Demolition CST Environmental No Response HB Walker, Inc. No Response L & L Demolition & Salvage Inc. 50,000 30% X X Maximus Demolition 50,000 50% X X [1] The estimated C&D waste cubic yards per year and the estimated percent recycled data was estimated and provided by the haulers interviewed. No effort was made to independently verify the estimates. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 13 EPIC

69 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation 7. Transfer Transfer of Class I waste is fairly common and a significant part of managing the overall waste stream; however, transfer does not appear to be a significant component or step in the current management of C&D/Class III. Typically, hauling companies transport the C&D/Class III waste to the closest facility. If source separation is requested by the customer or LEED certification, separate containers are provided and the waste is transported directly to the facility. As the industry develops, it is anticipated that transfer of loads for recycling will become an integral part of the management practices. 8. Processing/Disposal The extent of processing, and consequently disposal, varies considerably throughout the County. There are a number of permitted C&D, Class III and mixed waste recycling (MRF) facilities in Orange County. In addition, these facilities also handle waste from other areas, including Hillsborough County, Pinellas County and neighboring Counties. Permitted facilities were contacted and requested to provide the following types of information: Location and waste disposal/processing activities Type and amount of material handled Current recycling practices, including type of material recycled, end market recyclers and amount of material recycled Processing capacity Remaining disposal capacity Table 8-1 summarizes the information obtained from the processing and disposal facilities and the location of these facilities is shown on Figure 8-1. As seen in Table 8-1, for those facilities where tipping fee data was available, C&D processing fees vary from approximately $25 per ton to $41 per ton and C&D disposal fees vary from approximately $18 per ton to $25 per ton. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 14 EPIC

70 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Table 8-1 Class III and C&D Disposal and Processing Facilities Facility Name FDEP Status AMERICAN RECYCLING GROUP, LLC ACTIVE X ANGELO'S RECYCLED MATERIALS INC ACTIVE X Ash Monofill Class III Landfill BAY LAKE CLASS 3 LANDFILL (Located in Reedy Creek) ACTIVE X GOLDEN GEM ROAD CLASS III LANDFILL ACTIVE X X Composting Plant C&D Debris C&D Debris Recycling Land Clearing Debris Material Recovery Transfer Station Comment/Additional Information Estimated Amount Disposed or Processed, cy/yr Estimated % Recycled Estimated Remaining Life, yrs Recently permitted and operating. Permit under review, data from 2009 report. Primarily recycling concrete and asphalt. 500, % N/A Significant on-site recycling through source separation; LEED is encouraged. Only accepts waste from Reedy Creek waste. 200,000 20% 48 Accepts material (residual) from SWS (See Note1) 400,000 10% 3 Tipping Fees $4.75 a yard or $25.00 per ton C&D - $24.00 per ton; Class III - $24.00 per ton; Yd Waste - $34.00 per ton; Hard to Handle - $9.00 per yd ; Large Land clearing - $6.00 per yd (Minimum Charges: $40.00 for less than 20 yds; $60.00 for more than 20 yds) HONEY BEE RANCH LCD ACTIVE X Yard Waste Only, Enforcement by EPD at this time. N/A N/A N/A KEENE ROAD LANDFILL - CLASS III ACTIVE X X Closed N/A N/A N/A HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 15 EPIC

71 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Facility Name FDEP Status Ash Monofill Class III Landfill Composting Plant C&D Debris MID-FLORIDA MATERIALS (AKA HUBBARD) ACTIVE X MOUNT DORA DISPOSAL AND FILL ACTIVE X ORANGE COUNTY LF ACTIVE X X X C&D Debris Recycling Land Clearing Debris Material Recovery Transfer Station Comment/Additional Information Estimated Amount Disposed or Processed, cy/yr Estimated % Recycled Estimated Remaining Life, yrs Concrete crushing on-site; wood waste for landscaping and boiler feed. 20% is from Hubbard. 250,000 18% 30 Located in Lake County, but significant processor of waste from Orange County. 400,000 15% 20 Currently very limited Class III recycling, however plans to start metal, concrete, cardboard and lumber. 500,000 5% 65 ORLANDO RECYCLED MATERIALS COMPLAINT According to EPD, site closed. N/A N/A N/A ORLANDO TRANSFER STATION-WPF ACTIVE X Class I N/A N/A N/A Recycle of ash for temperate road base (at OCL) and concrete additive; on-site OUC STANTON ENERGY CENTER ACTIVE X landfill of unused ash. (Internal processing facility only.) N/A N/A N/A PINE RIDGE LANDFILL (AKA 545 SANIFILL LF) ACTIVE X X WM LEED facility; Handles LEED and recycle loads from multiple Counties; Recycling typical products, including dry wall (gypsum powder for soil 200,000 10% 28 Tipping Fees Gate Rate C&D - $4.25 per yard ; Land clearing - $8.50 per yard; Clean Concrete No Charge if load clean, otherwise $4.25 per yard; For job site contract with large volumes: C&D - $3.75 per yard C&D - $4.00 per yd.; Large Land clearing - $6.00 per yd; (Minimum Charge: $25.00) C&D: $18.60 per ton ($60 minimum per load); yard waste: $34 per ton ($60 minimum per load) HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 16 EPIC

72 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Facility Name FDEP Status Ash Monofill Class III Landfill Composting Plant C&D Debris C&D Debris Recycling Land Clearing Debris Material Recovery Transfer Station Comment/Additional Information amendment. Estimated Amount Disposed or Processed, cy/yr Estimated % Recycled Estimated Remaining Life, yrs Tipping Fees RECYCLE AMERICA OF ORANGE COUNTY ACTIVE X Class I recycling Facility. N/A N/A N/A REEDY CREEK TRANSFER STATION ACTIVE X Transfer of Class I. N/A N/A N/A ROCKET BLVD MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY ACTIVE X Republic Services site. 60,000 30% N/A TAFT RECYCLING (AKA SOUTH ORLANDO MRF) ACTIVE X X Data from 2009 C&D report. 5, % N/A VISTA LANDFILL, LLC., CLASS III (BUTTREY/KEENE RD SOUTH) ACTIVE X WEST ORANGE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES C&D ACTIVE X WM facility (60% of waste from WM). 500,000 10% 28 Recycling facility with picking station. Additional information in report. Co-located with C&D disposal facility. 100,000 70% N/A Class III - $53.00; C & D - $41.00; Single stream loads (or rich in recyclables) are negotiated based on the yield and value of the different materials in the load C&D/Class III: $24.10 per ton ($60 minimum per load); yard waste: $34 per ton ($60 minimum per load) HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 17 EPIC

73 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Facility Name FDEP Status Ash Monofill Class III Landfill Composting Plant C&D Debris WEST ORANGE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES C&D ACTIVE X C&D Debris Recycling Land Clearing Debris Material Recovery Transfer Station Comment/Additional Information Estimated Amount Disposed or Processed, cy/yr Estimated % Recycled Estimated Remaining Life, yrs West Orange, Mt. Dora and Golden Gem under same ownership. 500,000 N/A 5 Tipping Fees C&D - $5.00 per yd; Hard to Handle - $9.00 per yd ; Large Land clearing - $6.00 per yd (Minimum Charge: $25.00) Notes: 1. Sun Recycling (an SWS Company) is a recycling company in South Florida with 4 recycling centers and 3 transfer stations. According to SWS they process about 3 million cy per year with a recycle rate of 86%. Some residual waste sent to Golden Gem. 2. Some data reported in tons/year. Converted to cubic yards/year based on bulk density of 300 to 1,000 lb/cy depending on reported composition (i.e. amount of concrete) 3. Based on reported values, approximately 3 million cy of material processed in Orange County (estimated to be 700,000 to 1,000,000 tons per year). HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 18 EPIC

74 CR 455 CR 439 KIRKMAN RD ORANGE BLOSSOM TRAIL SEMORAN BLVD FRENCH AVE NARCOOSSEE RD CR 448 CR 455 CR 48 SR 46!( «6 «4 SR 46 «5!(!U CR 437 CR 44A CR437 SR 46 SR 44 CR 46 A ORANGE BLOSSOM TRL «12!( «2 #* SR 46 MAITLAND BLVD SR 46 ALTAMONTE DR MAITLAND BLVD C R BEALL BLVD 1ST ST US 17/92 SR 434 SR 46 E LAKE MARY BLVD CENTRAL AV SR 46 SR 415 SR 415 OSCEOLA RD CR 426 SR 46 SR 46 SR 46 / MAIN ST US 1 US 1 US 1 Legend O! ASH MONOFIL!( C & D LANDFILL!U C & D LANDFILL/MATERIAL RECOVERY #* C & D RECYCLING!( CLASS III LANDFILL!U CLASS III LANDFILL/MATERIAL RECOVERY #* MATERIAL RECOVERY ORANGE COUNTY US 27 SR 50 CR 474 CR 455 CR 455 US 27 SR 50 W B BILL MCGEE HWY!U US 192!( #* WEST BRONSON HWY MARTIN LUTHER KING B JOHN YOUNG PKWY JOHN YOUNG PKWY LEE RD #* ORANGE AV HANSEL AVE OSCEOLA PKWY ALOMA AV «!( 9 «7 «3 «13 «1 «#* 11 «10 ALAFAYA TR!( LAKE PICKETT RD «8! CR 419 COLONIAL DR SR 528 / BEACHLINE COLONIAL DR SR528 BEACHLINE EXP SR 520 CHENEY HIGHWAY SR 407 SR 520 ID Facility Name 1 AMERICAN RECYCLING GROUP, LLC 2 ANGELO'S RECYCLED MATERIALS INC 3 BAY LAKE CLASS 3 LANDFILL 4 GOLDEN GEM ROAD CLASS III LANDFILL 5 MID-FLORIDA MATERIALS (HUBBARD) 6 MT DORA DISPOSAL FACILITY 7 ORANGE COUNTY LF 8 OUC STANTON ENERGY CENTER 9 PINE RIDGE LANDFILL 10 ROCKET BLVD MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY 11 TAFT RECYCLING (SOUTH ORLANDO MRF) 12 VISTA LANDFILL, LLC., CLASS III 13 WEST ORANGE ENV. RESOURCES C&D US 27 VINE ST VINE ST NOVA RD ORANGE COUNTY SOILD WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCES PLAN Miles SCALE CLASS III, C&D AND RECYCLING FACILITIES FIGURE 8-1

75 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Some facilities were able to supply additional details regarding their operation, material processing, and recycling, which is useful in understanding the current situation of the industry, markets for recyclables and possible future trends. The additional information is provided in the following paragraphs. Waste Management Waste Management of Florida, Inc (WM) operates two landfills in Orange County that accept C&D and Class III waste: Pine Ridge and Vista. Pine Ridge is a permitted C&D landfill and recycling facility (LEED facility) and Vista is permitted as a Class III landfill. Information was provided regarding the origin of waste entering the facilities. WM reported that approximately 50% of the waste was supplied by WM. As shown on Table 8-2, nearly half of the waste originates from areas outside of Orange County, with Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties accounting for 30-40% of the waste. This percentage can vary from year to year. Table 8-2 Origin of Waste at Pine Ridge and Vista Landfills Pine Ridge Landfill Vista Landfill C&D Waste Origin Amount (tons, unless noted) Amount (tons, unless noted) % of Total % of Total Brevard % % Hillsborough 28, % 41, % Lake % % Orange 64, % 116, % Osceola 2, % 6 0.0% Pinellas 11, % 19, % Polk 1, % % Seminole 0 0.0% % Volusia 0 0.0% 3 0.0% Other % % Total 109, , Note: Data reported by WM for HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 20 EPIC

76 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Data reported for the Pine Ridge facility was evaluated for recycling activities. Table 8-3 summarizes the amount of waste received from LEED contracts, as well as the approximate amount and percentages of material recycled. Table 8-3 Pine Ridge Recycling Data (2010) Item Amount, tons % of Total Waste % of LEED Material Total Waste Received 109, LEED 26, % --- Cardboard % 0.1% Drywall % 0.1% Metal % 2.5% HDPE/PVC % 0.0% Wood % 0.1% Concrete 1, % 4.1% Total % Note: Data reported by WM for West Orange Environmental Resources C&D. West Orange Environmental Resources C&D operates both a C&D disposal and MRF facility on the same site. The facility is owned by Orange County Environmental, LLC, which also owns two other disposal facilities in the area: Mt. Dora and Golden Gem Road Landfill. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 21 EPIC

77 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation A site visit was conducted to observe and document the operation. Information from the site visit is summarized below and Pictures 1, 2, 3 and 4 show features of the recycling operation. West Orange Summary The entire facility (landfill and MRF) receives approximately 2,000 cy per day and the MRF processes approximately 600 cy per day. Approximately 30% of the MRF material is from LEED projects and the remaining is from other sources, including loads diverted from the landfill. Spotters at the landfill identify loads that are potentially suitable for recycling. Once easily separated items are removed from the waste, the material is fed onto a sorting line (conveyor belt, dirt recovery area and stations for manual sorting). See Pictures 1 and 2. The type of material and extent of separation is based on end product uses and recycler requirements. The following material is separated for recycling: o Cardboard o Metal (additional separation by type, such as brass, ferrous, aluminum and tin) o Concrete o Lumber o Composite wood o Wood pallets o Plastic (i.e. bottles) o Plastic pipe (HDPE and PVC) HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 22 EPIC

78 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Picture 1 MRF Sorting Machine and Feed Material Picture 2 MRF Conveyor and Sorting Stations HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 23 EPIC

79 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Picture 3 Stockpiled Concrete Picture 4 Stockpiled Plastic Pipe HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 24 EPIC

80 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation General information was also provided regarding incoming waste, outbound (or stored) recyclables and landfilled (un-recycled) material. Figure 8-2 shows the relative amount of material based on weight, as reported by West Orange Environmental. Cardboard, 3% Metal, 7% Landfilled, 26% Wood, 11% Concete, 53% Figure 8-2 Typical Distribution of Recycled Material West Orange Environmental 9. End Markets End market refers to the final processor of the material that prepares the material for market, such as a concrete crusher or a metals processor (shredding and re-sale of bulk material in the metals market). Table 9-1 lists some of the common new products or uses for recycled material. Table 9-1 Typical New Products and Uses for Recycled Material Used C&D Material New Product Use Cardboard Raw material Raw material for boxes and containers Concrete Aggregate Base for road building Drainage applications/bank stabilization Metal Raw material Raw material for metals fabricators Plastic pipe Raw material Raw material for plastic and pipe Wood Mulch Landscaping / Erosion control Industrial fuel source Compost additive/soil amendment HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 25 EPIC

81 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Based on information from the waste haulers and processors, a list of local end market companies was compiled. It is important to note that many of these companies have multiple facilities throughout the County. Table 9-2 summarizes the local companies and the material accepted for processing. Additional information from the County regarding concrete crushers, based on active permits, is also included in the table below. Table 9-2 Partial List of End-Product C&D Recycle Companies in Central Florida Company Address City State Zip Phone Material Angelo's Recycled Materials Inc 2105 Vulcan Rd Apopka FL Concrete and Asphalt Promax Recycling Inc Apopka Blvd Apopka FL Concrete Double D Crushers Avalon Road Winter Garden FL Concrete Independence Recycling 9800 Recycle Center Rd., Ste. A Orlando FL Concrete American Demolition (Douglas Transport & Recycling Co) 118 W Grant St Orlando FL Concrete BG Group Portable Crusher Pompano FL Concrete BPH Rock Avalon Rd Orlando FL Concrete Calleja, Joe E 4000 Forsyth Rd Orlando FL Concrete CEM Enterprises Avalon Rd Winter Garden FL Concrete Central Hauling and Excavating Rocket Blvd Orlando FL Concrete Crushing Inc Portable Crushing Unit 3350 Reynolds Rd Lakeland FL Concrete D L Rees Rocket Blvd Orlando FL Concrete Eagle Crusher (Eco-Rock Resource) 2930 Eunice Ave Orlando FL Concrete Orlando Recycled Materials Inc 2300 Mercator Dr Orlando FL Concrete Middlesex Asphalt LLC; Orange County Asphalt Plant # Cosmonaut Blvd Orlando FL Concrete Brothers Scrap Metals Inc 420 S Norton Av Orlando FL Metal HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 26 EPIC

82 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Company Address City State Zip Phone Material Trademark Metals (Note 1) 51 East Landstreet Rd Orlando FL Metal GEL Corporate Headquarters (Note 2) 1200 S. Leavitt Ave. Orange City MRF Taft Recycling, Inc 375 7th Street Taft FL MRF West Orange Environmental Resources, LLC Winter Garden FL MRF 7706 Avalon Road Note 1. Three locations (Landstreet, Lockhart, Kaley); ferrous and non ferrous metals, lead-acid batteries and autos 2. GEL facility located at the Volusia County Tomoka Farms Road Landfill (Daytona Beach). Effectiveness and extent of recycling for various materials is dependent on the commodity price, as well as the transportation considerations related to bulk density of the material. To provide perspective on this information, volume/weight relationships were used to estimate a bulk density for the material, and information on typical material pricing was obtained. Table 9-3 summarizes the bulk density relationship as well as the typical material pricing. Please note that pricing is highly dependent on a number of factors such as the quality/type of the material and market conditions Table 9-3 Typical Bulk Density and Material Pricing (2010) Material Bulk Density, lb/cy Typical Price in 2010, $/ton Mixed Waste 350 to Cardboard Metal Wood Concrete 1, Note: Price dependent quality/type of the material and market conditions. Data on historical trends in recycling markets for Target Waste Type is not readily available, and represents a data gap to fully understanding the Target Waste Type life cycle. While traditional recyclables market data is available, and has been highly variable, it is not clear whether the Target Waste Type recyclables markets have also been as variable. HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 27 EPIC

83 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation 10. Summary of Findings In general, three basic methods of C&D recycling were documented. On-site source separation (separate roll-offs provided for each type of material). Some level of deconstruction or removing of components prior to demolition. Mixed Waste Recycling (MRF). The industry is fairly fragmented and recycling typically occurs through either customer requests (i.e. LEED certification) or profit considerations (i.e. demolition companies). Mixed waste recycling is a relatively new industry in central Florida. Additional findings are summarized as follows: Some level of recycling occurs throughout the process of collection, hauling and disposing of C&D waste. Based on the reported information, approximately 20% of the C&D waste stream is being recycled. The amount of recycling is much higher for concrete and metal. Limited uses and markets are available for wood, dry wall, and plastic pipe. The amount of recycling is very dependent on the generator goals. Information regarding the amount of waste and recycling is not readily or consistently recorded. Material is measured in multiple units (tons, cubic yards, loads, etc) which make tracking, record keeping and data analysis difficult. There appears to be increasing specialization as waste is moved through from collection to end market. There is uncertainty about potential rule changes based on the new State 75% recycling goal, and its impacts on C&D material. The current major barriers to the recycling of C&D wastes in Orange County appear to be: o Lack of Established End Markets o Landfilling Affordability vs. the Cost to Recycle o Lack of Infrastructure HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 28 EPIC

84 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation Acknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number(s) DE-EE HDR Engineering, Inc. Page 29 EPIC

85 ATTACMENT A List of Haulers, Disposal Sites and Processors (Contact and information)

86 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation DRAFT Contact List - Commercial Haulers and Demolition Companies Company Address City State Zip Phone Contact Interested Advanced Disposal of Central FL, LLC 405 Thorpe Rd. Orlando FL Gene Carroll gcarroll@advanceddisposal.com Yes American Waste Management, DBA: Eye Can Bob Randolph Trucking & Loader Services Cat & I, Inc. Central Environmental Services Central Rock & Supply Clean Site Services, Inc Klondike Pl. Sanford FL Mike Novello americanwastemgmt@earthlink.net Yes Douglas Rd. Groveland FL Unknown Phil. C. Winter Regina Peters Rd. Garden FL Campbell flsunred@aol.com Yes 3210 Friendly Ave. Orlando FL P. O. Box Orlando FL Partridge Ln. Orlando FL Richard Lorenz rj-demoace@usa.net Yes Don Sandargas No Jackie Giorgio No Container Rental Co., Inc Staten Rd. Orlando FL Jerry Allen jerry@orlandowastepaper.com Yes Debris & Roll- Off Services 351 Deer Pointe Cir. Casselberry FL Ron Raymond rraymond@cfl.rr.com Yes DisposAll, Inc N. Orange Blossom Trl. Orlando FL Eddy Chiara marylou@refusemgmt.com Yes Global Rental Dumpsters, Inc Silver Star Rd. Orlando FL Tina Weaver tina@grddumpster.com Yes Home Builders Services of Florida, Inc HWY 119 Longmont CO Angie Tilghman angie.tilghman@cofence.com Yes Keller Outdoor, Inc Marquette Ave. Sanford FL Cheryl Smith agillmor@kelleroutdoorfla.com Yes HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

87 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation DRAFT Company Address City State Zip Phone Contact Interested One Waste Services, Inc 2263 Clark St. Apopka FL Shawn Lilles Unknown PCM Construction Services, LLC 1775 W. Williams St. Box 179 Apex NC Unknown Pece Of Mind Disposal, Inc Aber Rd. Orlando FL Sam Benton Yes Pro Dump Services, LLC 5003 Patch Rd. Orlando FL Republic Services Nathan No Rocket Blvd. Orlando FL Fred Olsen Yes Rhino Can, Inc. P.O. Box 327 Ocoee FL Unknown SP Recycling Corp., DBA: Aggressive 5303 N. Orange Hauling Sunshine Recycling, Inc. TEC Diversified Blossom Trl. Orlando FL Paul Junk Yes 1263 W. Landstreet Rd. Orlando FL Bill Milligan Yes P. O. Box Shannon Orlando FL Ethridge Yes USA Services of Florida, Inc. P.O. Box Longwood FL Veolia ES Environmental 1964 S. Orange Services, Inc. Blossom Trl. Apopka FL Waste Management of 3510 Rio Vista Orlando Waste Pro of Florida Phil Formichelli No Regina Carolia Unknown Ave. Orlando FL Unknown 3705 St. Johns Parkway Sanford FL Tim Dolan Yes HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

88 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation DRAFT Company Address City State Zip Phone Contact Interested Waste Runners, LLC (formerly Advance Waste ) P. O. Box 715 Brandon FL Rich No Waste Services of Florida, Inc Miller Dr. Altamonte Springs FL Dennis Pantano dpantano@wsii.us Unknown Waste Depot LLC DBA: Waste Works Weeks & Weeks Waste Services, Inc. DBA: Central Florida Dumpsters Demolition Companies. CST Environmental HB Walker, Inc. L & L Demolition & Salvage Inc. Maximus Demolition 320 Enterprise St. Ocoee FL Paul Reddish paul@wasteworksusa.com Yes P. O. Box Longwood FL Dale Weeks dweeks1@cfl.rr.com Yes 9180 Boggy Creek Road Orlando FL Unknown 2895 Mercy Drive Orlando FL Unknown 5500 Old Winter Garden Road Orlando FL S. Orange Blossom Trail Orlando FL Lenny Linhares lldemo@mpinet.net Yes Ted Chapman maximusdemolition@earthlink.net Yes HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

89 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation DRAFT Contact List Disposal Sites and Processors Facility Name AMERICAN RECYCLING GROUP, LLC ANGELO'S RECYCLED MATERIALS INC BAY LAKE CLASS 3 LANDFILL GOLDEN GEM ROAD CLASS III LANDFILL HONEY BEE RANCH LCD KEENE ROAD LANDFILL - CLASS III MID-FLORIDA MATERIALS (AKA HUBBARD) MOUNT DORA DISPOSAL AND FILL Owner AMERICAN RECYCLING GROUP, LLC ANGELO'S AGGREGATE MATERIALS, LTD WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, LLC HONEY BEE WASTE MANAGEMENT HUBBARD CONSTRUCTION Facility Address City Zip Phone Contact Interest 320 Enterprise St Ocoee VULCAN RD APOPKA MI W MAGIC KINGDOM THEME PK ORLANDO Paul Reddish paul@wasteworksusa.com Yes Genny Iafrate angelosrocks@yahoo.com Yes Jose Garcia Yes GOLDEN Rob GEM RD APOPKA Fintak rob@oceflorida.com Yes EAST COLONIAL DRIVE #322 ORLANDO N/A 255 W. KEENE ROAD APOPKA N/A GOLDEN GEM RD APOPKA COMPANY ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, LLC 3300 SR 46 Mount Dora Dennis Severance dennis.severance@hubbard.c om Yes Rob Fintak rob@oceflorida.com Yes ORANGE COUNTY LF ORLANDO RECYCLED MATERIALS ORANGE COUNTY BOCC YOUNG PINE RD ORLANDO Debbie Sponsler Debbie.Sponsler@ocfl.net Yes 2300 Mercator Dr Orlando N/A HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

90 Orange County Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan Summary of Current Situation DRAFT ORLANDO TRANSFER STATION-WPF OUC STANTON ENERGY CENTER PINE RIDGE LANDFILL (AKA 545 SANIFILL LF) RECYCLE AMERICA OF ORANGE COUNTY REEDY CREEK TRANSFER STATION ROCKET BLVD MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY TAFT RECYCLING (AKA SOUTH ORLANDO MRF) VISTA LANDFILL, LLC., CLASS III (BUTTREY/KEEN E RD SOUTH) WEST ORANGE ENVIRONMENTA L RESOURCES C&D WEST ORANGE ENVIRONMENTA L RESOURCES C&D WASTE MANAGEMENT INC. OF FLORIDA HEADWATERS RESOUCES, INC. WASTE MANAGEMENT WASTE MANAGEMENT REEDY CREEK IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT REPUBLIC SERVICES TAFT RECYCLING, INC. IRVINSLIKE ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, LLC ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, LLC 4986 L.B.MCLEOD ROAD ORLANDO N/A 5100 S. ALAFAYA TRAIL ORLANDO N/A N/A 5400 DANBURY ROAD WINTER GARDEN IRV SLIKE islike@wm.com Yes YOUNG PINE RD ORLANDO N/A 5500 NORTH CAST DRIVE LAKE BUENA VISTA Jose Garcia Yes ROCKET BLVD ORLANDO Fed Olsen olsenf@repsrv.com Yes 375 7TH STREET TAFT cell WEST KEENE RD APOPKA AVALON ROAD 7706 AVALON ROAD WINTER GARDEN WINTER GARDEN Wilson Estves IRV SLIKE islike@wm.com Yes Greg Fowler greg@oceflorida.com Yes Rob Fintak rob@oceflorida.com Yes HDR Engineering, Inc. EPIC

91 Appendix B: Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals Stakeholder Meeting Presentation

92 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

93 Class III and C & D Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan Stakeholder Meeting: Vision, Goals, Guiding Principles May 31, 2011

94 Agenda Project Overview Overview of Current Situation Group Discussion Vision Group Discussion Guiding Principles Group Discussion i Goals Group Discussion Strategies

95 Project Drivers Florida Statute Chapter 403 Amendments Orange County Comprehensive Policy Plan Orange County Green Government Initiatives Development of a Sustainable Economy EECBG Funding ojects.aspx

96 Target Waste Type Class III and Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris solid waste that is generated within or transported into the County Examples of Class III Waste: Yard trash, construction and demolition debris, processed tires, asbestos, carpet, cardboard, paper, glass, plastic, furniture other than appliances

97 Project Overview Assess the current situation Establish vision, guiding principles and goals for the SWIRP Develop a short list of strategies Consider Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals Analyze short listed strategies Triple bottom line approach Recommended strategies Finalize the SWIRP

98 Overview of Current Situation Generation Marketing/ End Use Collection Processing Disposal

99 FDEP Reports for million tons of C&D was disposed in Florida s 75 C&D disposal sites C&D constitutes 25% of Florida s MSW waste stream or 8.2 million tons Currently only 27% or 2.1 million tons of Florida s C&D is recycled Source: FDEP report: 75% Recycling Goal Report to the Legislature, January of 2010

100 700,000 Class III Waste Disposed at Orange County Landfill Yard Waste 600,000 Class III 500,000 Waste 400, , , ,000 0 Fiscal Year Source: Orange County Landfill tonnage data

101 County Class III Generation Projections County-Wide Class III and C&D Generation (Tons/Year) Projected in 2003 Adjusted Projection Mid-Point Between 2003 and Adjusted ,413, , ,693, ,900 1,221, ,955, ,300 1,412, ,246, ,800 1,623, ,524,302 1,123,600 1,824,000 Source 2003 Projection Data: Final Report Solid Waste Master Plan, Orange County Solid Waste Division (SCS Engineers, January 30, 2009)

102 UCF Project Overview Project Goals To improve the accuracy of C&D debris inventories To perform a C&D recovered material market analysis To promote C&D recycling by providing information and examples of best management practices Overall Objective To Increase C&D debris recycling efficiency in the State of Florida

103 Inventory Methodology Building permit data is linked to C&D activity to estimate the mass of debris generated. Area data for this study were given by Orange County s Information Systems and Services (ISS) division. Where area data are unavailable, valuations for six C&D sectors are determined and divided by the average cost per area for each sector. $ $ Area Area Then, generation rates are applied d( (mass/area). Mass Area Mass Area

104 Benefits of Approach The resulting model can be: Used to determine historical trends for C&D debris generation Used to estimate future C&D debris generation oeconomic Drivers Benefits The building permit database is constantly updated allowing the model to be easily updated in a timely manner

105 Results Debris Generation- All Six Sectors 300, , ,000 De ebris (Tons) 150, ,000 50, Year

106 Comparison Location Year C&D Debris Generation Rate (pcd) This study (9 Year Average) OC Data from FDEP Reports (9 Year Average) U.S. National Average Range U.S. National Avg FL State Average South Carolina Australia Ireland FL State Average WA/DE/NH/VT/WI California California Day Pounds/Cap Year UCF FDEP

107 Current Collection Provided by commercial haulers, demolition companies and other private entities. Anecdotally, 60 to 70% of the Class III waste delivered to County Landfill is from licensed commercial haulers, remainder from homeowners and other private construction or hauling companies.

108 Current Collection Based on phone interviews: Many hauling companies provide recycling by hauling source separated material directly to processors or directly to a MRF Mainly when customer requested LEED certification Demolition i companies provide a higher h level lof recycling (approximately 30 to 50%) to maximize project profit

109 Current Processing and Disposal The extent of processing, and consequently disposal, varies throughout the County. There are a number of permitted C&D, Class III and mixed waste recycling (MRF) facilities in Orange County. Some of these facilities also handle waste from neighboring counties, and as far away as Hillsborough County and Pinellas County

110 Current Processing and Disposal Based on phone interviews, for those facilities where tipping fee data was available: C&D processing fees vary from approximately $25 per ton to $41 per ton C&D disposal fees vary from approximately $18 per ton to $25 per ton

111 Current End Markets Data on historical trends in recycling markets for Target Waste Type is not readily available Traditional recyclables market data is available, and has been highly variable It is not clear whether the Target Waste Type recyclables marketshave also been as variable

112 End Use Used C&D Material New Product Use Raw material for boxes and Cardboard Raw material containers Concrete Aggregate g Base for road building Drainage applications/bank stabilization Raw material for metals Metal Raw material fabricators Plastic pipe Raw material Raw material for plastic and pipe Landscaping / Erosion Wood Mulch control Industrial fuel source Compost additive/soil amendment

113 Regulatory, Policies, General Climate State Level FAC Amendments, Chapter (January 2010) Specifically address CCA treated wood Prescribed liner system requirements for Class III landfills Florida Statute t t Chapter 403 Amendments 75% recycling goal by 2020 Requires each county to implement a program for recycling C&D waste All C&D waste must be processed prior to disposal Requires reporting of amount of C&D waste processed and recycled prior to disposal Presumption that C&D facilities will be required to have liners

114 Regulatory, Policy, General Climate County Level Orange County Green Government Initiatives Orange County targets for its Climate Change Plan (Reductions based on 2005 GHG emissions): 15% reduction by % reduction by % reduction by 2020 Goal #5 Adopt Policies to Support Recycling, Methane Recovery & Biomass Energy Objective G Increase existing recycling goals for private landfills Objective H Help establish local markets for recycled constr ction materials construction materials Goal #7 Adopt Policies to Support Green Buildings

115 Regulatory, Policy, General Climate County Comprehensive Policy Plan The Conservation Element objective OBJ C1.10 Orange County shall conserve energy resources for future generations policy C : Orange County shall investigate and implement alternative means of reducing the County's solid waste and dependencyonfossil fuels. The Solid Waste Element relevant policies: SW The County shall encourage and support the permitting of Class III or Construction and Demolition landfills over a wide geographic area SW1.2.2 Orange County shall continue to promote private sector participation in resource recovery systems to the extent feasible SW Orange Countyshall support theestablishment establishment ofa wallboard recycling facility and discourage the land filling of wallboard from private and public disposal facilities

116 Highlights Class III and C&D Waste will continue to be generated Based on the reported information, approximately 20% of the C&D waste stream is being recycled Concrete, cardboard d and metal appear to be the most commonly and easily recycled materials Reporting of amount generated and recycled is not consistent Barriers to recycling: Lack of Established End Markets Landfilling Affordability vs. the Cost to Recycle Lack of Infrastructure

117 Vision for the SWIRP Provides a theme for the SWIRP Examples of a Vision i Statement: t t Design long term, sustainable, integrated waste management solutions for the Target Waste Types in Orange County. No unprocessed Target Waste Types will be delivered to landfills for disposal. Promote private sector participation in resource recovery systems for Target Waste Types in Orange County Group Discussion

118 Guiding Principles for the SWIRP Provide insight into shaping the goals of the project. Community specific (reflect community values) Examples of Guiding Principles: Create Green jobs Establish Public/private partnerships County leadership as a model for diversion practices Protect public health and the environment Group Discussion

119 Goals for the SWIRP Specific to the SWIRP Reflect the visionand guiding principles Measurable (quantitative or qualitative) Examples of Goals: 60% diversion of Target Waste Types by 2015 Develop and adopt new rules and incentives to reduce Target Waste disposal Attract t at least ttwo new end markets currently lacking for Target Waste Types in Orange County by 2015 Create at least 50 new jobs associated with recycling by 2015 Group Discussion

120 Strategies for the SWIRP Group Discussion Incentives Policies Regulations Specifications

121 Appendix C: Draft Management Strategies

122 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

123 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN SWIRP Draft Management Strategies The following potential management strategies have been prepared as the next step in the County s ongoing project to develop a Solid Waste Integrated Plan (SWIRP) that targets Class III solid waste, including construction and demolition debris (C&D). At this stage, these items are not necessarily recommendations but are being used to foster a discussion among stakeholders and to help to refine subsequent recommendations. 1) Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, haulers, and/or destination facility data. The current system of landfills and MRFs reporting to the state is not sufficient in terms of helping the County to understand the quantity of materials generated inside and outside of the County. Improve reporting on the generation, recycling and disposal of Class III and C&D waste through: Use of the building permit process and/or C&D ordinance to require all private developers, construction and demolition contractors, and/or others generating Class III and C&D materials to report the quantities diverted and disposed to the County upon completion of projects in a format approved by the County. This could require development of a more elaborate data tracking system in coordination with the building permit process. Requirement that all registered C&D waste haulers submit annual reports to the County on the amount of C&D materials collected by material type, the destination to which each of those materials were taken, and the amount of diversion documented to have been achieved at each of those facilities. Working to improve current requirement that some destination facilities report to the County annually on Class III and C&D tonnages received and origin of material. The County should implement reporting improvements regardless of whether a C&D ordinance requiring recycling for C&D projects is adopted (i.e. Strategy #2). 2) Job Site Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion Plan Adopt and implement a C&D diversion ordinance that includes the requirement to prepare a diversion plan and divert a certain percentage of materials from construction and demolition projects (e.g. 50% of all materials; or 75% of inerts such as asphalt, brick, concrete, dirt, fines, rock, sand, soil and stone, and 50% of remainder). Diversion could include options like deconstruction or the careful disassembly of buildings components for reuse, the reuse of recovered materials onsite or offsite, offsite recycling, or perhaps even waste toenergy. HDR Engineering, Inc. 1

124 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN A Diversion Plan would be submitted with projects requiring a Building Permit. As a local (land use) ordinance, the reporting on the implementation of the Diversion Plan would be required prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. A deposit could be required to be paid at the time of permit issuance based on the size and scope of the project. All or part of the deposit could be refunded on a pro rated basis once evidence of diversion is submitted to the County. Alternatively, the County could require the permit holder to pay a prorated non compliance fee if minimum diversion thresholds are not met during the course of the project. Review fees, forfeited deposits, and non compliance fees could be used to fund the program. The County should actively publicize the ordinance and its overall plan for C&D debris diversion and allow time for end markets and infrastructure to develop. 3) C&D Pre Processing Prior to Disposal Adopt and implement a C&D diversion ordinance that requires pre processing prior to disposal. This strategy was recommended by FDEP in its 2010 report to the 2010 Florida Legislature and subsequently adopted as amendments to Florida Statute 403. One consideration of the FS language is the provision of a not well defined extent economically feasible clause. A local ordinance should mirror the Florida Statute and FAC Rules while clarifying the criteria that will be used at the local level for determining whether pre processing is required or not. Potential approaches include defining general thresholds for economic feasibility (e.g. remaining facility capacity and expected life) and requiring facilities to submit documentation to the County regarding the feasibility or infeasibility of pre processing. In addition, minimum percentages of materials would be required to be diverted during pre processing. For example: 25% total; or 75% of metals and 55% of concrete. Affected facilities would be allowed an adjustment/implementation period of a year or two to reach these minimum diversion requirements, with less aggressive interim goals to be met during the adjustment implementation period (i.e. must be diverting 10% of total tonnage by the end of year one and 25% of total tonnage by the end of year two). Accounting for the potential of a site receiving pre processed loads may either require additional record keeping or simply reflecting this as a lower overall minimum diversion rate. The County should actively publicize the C&D pre processing requirements and its overall plan for C&D debris diversion and allow time for end markets and infrastructure to develop. 4) Landfill Ban for certain types of C&D materials Establish an Ordinance that bans the disposal of certain types of materials. Identify materials with sufficient recycling potential (such as asphalt, brick, concrete, cardboard, and wood) and establish HDR Engineering, Inc. 2

125 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN maximum allowable percentages of components in loads tipped at landfills. For example, loads must contain less than a specified number of tons or a specified percentage of a particular material; otherwise it must be diverted for segregation and recycling prior to disposal. This could be accomplished in a stepped approach, starting with a material like concrete that is already being recycled by many, then adding metals for which there are good markets, and later adding other materials that there may be less demand for. This would need to be a cooperative effort between the County and local municipalities, and would require State and regional support. The intent of the ban would be to encourage the recycling or composting of banned materials and to encourage facilities to create incentives for haulers/waste producers to remove the banned /recyclable materials from the waste stream. The County could require facility operators to develop a plan showing that they will not dispose of waste that is commingled with too much of the banned substances by processing for recycling onsite or offsite. Elements to be addressed in the plan are similar to the spotting already performed for unauthorized waste: Monitoring of all incoming loads Comprehensive inspection of certain loads Response to failed loads o Notice to the sender o Records kept on failed loads greater than a certain size o Loads rejected (unless facility recycles the banned materials) o Facility may fine hauler or provide incentives Facilities would have the option to either set up a recycling program for the banned materials received at their facility, or create incentives for haulers/waste generators to separate recyclables prior to delivery to the facility. Such incentives could include fines for violations, rewards for cooperation, and/or rejection of non compliant loads. Facilities that do not comply with the ban and their submitted plan could be fined by the County. The County should actively publicize the landfill ban on selected C&D materials and its overall plan for C&D debris diversion and allow time for end markets and infrastructure to develop. 5) Building Contractor Education Develop educational information and outreach methods to inform contractors of alternatives to landfill disposal of their C&D waste. Contractor education programs typically aim to illustrate the environmental and economic value of C&D recycling to contractors and provide them with information on local resources and alternatives, with the goal of encouraging a change in their thinking and behavior related to C&D reuse and recycling. Examples of possible topics to be covered include: green building practices focused on waste reduction, deconstruction, on site source separation, recycling at mixed waste or C&D processing facilities, and information regarding any local C&D ordinances, resources, or incentive programs. HDR Engineering, Inc. 3

126 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN The County could provide resources regarding how to conduct a detailed building inventory to assess the initial feasibility of deconstruction. Provide education and resources on the process for planning, permitting, and contracting related to deconstruction projects, and the marketing of recovered materials resulting from the project. The County could also provide building contractors with worksheets to assist with diversion cost benefit analysis, to assist them in determining whether on site source separation is economically feasible. Information should also be provided to contractors regarding area haulers and/or facilities that are already doing significant pre processing and diversion. 6) C&D Disposal Surcharge (Community Host Fee) Enact a surcharge for landfill disposal of C&D debris and use the proceeds to support waste diversion and public education efforts. Funds could be utilized to support other strategies for implementation, such as developing data gathering and reporting mechanisms (i.e. database and links to building permit applications). This would be most effective as a cooperative effort with local municipalities in order to be consistent throughout the County, and pool resources for funding consistent public education efforts. 7) Adopt C&D diversion policies and procedures that strongly encourage the diversion of C&D materials. Policies would be in the form of an informal advisory document or a program that strongly encourages the diversion of C&D materials, but would not provide the kind of enforcement mechanism that an ordinance would provide. It would simply express a preference on the part of the County that C&D waste be diverted for reuse or recycling wherever feasible. The purpose of such a policy is to encourage C&D diversion without actually requiring it. This can be a viable alternative to an ordinance when a jurisdiction does not have the time and resources necessary to fully implement an ordinance. It can also be used as a "stepping stone", moving toward an ordinance requiring diversion. Procedures that would encourage diversion of C&D materials could include: Structural and/or financial incentives for green building o For example, the County currently offers expedited review/permitting processes for green building projects. o Other incentives that could be implemented should be evaluated. Reduce permitting hurdles for recycling facilities to the extent possible, while maintaining the necessary controls needed by the County. o Make the permitting process easier to encourage recycling facilities. o Two task forces in the county general permitting and environmental permitting are already working on this. HDR Engineering, Inc. 4

127 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN Encourage local end use intermediates markets. o Work with local economic development groups such as the Metro Orlando Economic Development Coalition to bring these types of businesses to the area. 8) Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers. Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers that would encourage them to increase diversion of C&D material. This could be accomplished through modifications to existing licensing procedures with the C&D waste haulers in the County, and providing incentives for C&D diversion through commensurate license fee decreases or rebates (or establish disincentives with commensurate fee increases for disposal versus recycling of C&D waste). This approach would require annual reporting on the part of the haulers. Another option would be to provide rebates to haulers or contractors for the delivery of C&D material to recycling facilities. Under such a program, levels of recyclables delivered to recycling facilities would be documented and communicated to the County which would issue the rebates. Rebate programs are typically voluntary. In order to provide rebate funding, this Strategy would need to be coupled with a revenue generating Strategy. Other Strategies It should be noted that as part of this project many potential strategies have already been evaluated at a high level. Some of these strategies have been combined in some form with those that appear on this list. Other strategies were in effect ranked low and don t appear on this list because of poor potential for success, difficulties in implementation, inconsistencies with the Guiding Principles, low anticipated outcomes in achieving the Goals of this project, etc. For additional information on the SWIRP project please contact: Orange County Environmental Protection Division David Bromfield david.bromfield@ocfl.net HDR Engineering, Inc. 5

128 SOLID WASTE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN HDR Engineering, Inc. Allison Trulock Acknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number(s) DE EE Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. HDR Engineering, Inc. 6

129 Appendix D: Strategies Stakeholder Meeting Presentation

130 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

131 Class III and C & D Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan Stakeholder Meeting: Strategies February 28, 2012

132 Agenda Recap Project Overview Recap Current Situation Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals Group Discussion Strategies

133 Project Drivers Florida Statute Chapter 403 Amendments Orange County Comprehensive Policy Plan Orange County Green Government Initiatives Development of a Sustainable Economy EECBG Funding

134 Target Waste Type Class III and Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris solid waste that is generated within or transported into the County Examples of Class III Waste: Yard trash, construction and demolition debris, processed tires, carpet, cardboard, paper, glass, plastic, furniture other than appliances

135 Project Overview Assess the current situation Establish vision, guiding principles and goals for the SWIRP Develop a short list of strategies Consider Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals Analyze short listed strategies Triple bottom line approach Recommended strategies Finalize the SWIRP

136 Regulatory, Policies, General Climate State Level FAC Amendments, Chapter (January 2010) Specifically address CCA treated wood Prescribed liner system requirements for Class III landfills Florida Statute t t Chapter 403 Amendments 75% recycling goal by 2020 Requires each county to implement a program for recycling C&D waste All C&D waste must be processed prior to disposal Requires reporting of amount of C&D waste processed and recycled prior to disposal Presumption that C&D facilities will be required to have liners

137 Regulatory, Policy, General Climate County Level Orange County Green Government Initiatives Orange County targets for its Climate Change Plan (Reductions based on 2005 GHG emissions): Goal #5 Adopt Policies to Support Recycling, Methane Recovery & Biomass Energy Goal #7 Adopt Policies to Support Green Buildings

138 Regulatory, Policy, General Climate County Comprehensive Policy Plan The Conservation Element objective OBJ C Orange County shall conserve energy resources for future generations The Solid Waste Element relevant policies: Encourage and support the permitting of Class III or Construction and Demolition landfills over a wide geographic area Continue to promote private sector participation in resource recovery systems to the extent feasible Support the establishment of a wallboard recycling facility and discourage the land filling of wallboard from private andpublicdisposal disposal facilities

139 Highlights Class III and C&D Waste will continue to be generated Based on the reported information, approximately 20% of the C&D waste stream is being recycled Concrete, cardboard d and metal appear to be the most commonly and easily recycled materials Reporting of amount generated and recycled is not consistent Barriers to recycling: Lack of Established End Markets Landfilling Affordability vs. the Cost to Recycle Lack of Infrastructure

140 Vision for the SWIRP We foresee a community that uses available data to manage its construction and demolition debris, and other Class III solid waste, in the most economically sustainable, environmentally responsible, and socially equitable manner, by guiding the actions of an integrated system of consumers, generators, haulers, processors and recyclers, waste to energy converters, and disposal facilities.

141 Guiding Principles for the SWIRP 1. The integrated system should be economically efficient and sustainable: For the integrated system overall, and secondarily for individual id sectors of the system; By establishing public/private partnerships that foster innovative solutions; By developing viable end markets for recycled materials; and By adding economic value to the community, including the creation of jobs.

142 Guiding Principles for the SWIRP 2. The integrated system should be environmentally responsible and sustainable: By following the EPA Waste Management hierarchy a prioritized sequence of reducing generation, recycling and composting, converting waste to energy, and then disposal; By reusing materials at their highest value (e.g. reuse in similar products); and By reducing greenhouse gases and conserving energy

143 Guiding Principles for the SWIRP 3. The integrated system should be socially equitable and sustainable: By not unfairly rewarding or penalizing one constituency or region over another; and By not unfairly rewarding or penalizing one sector of the integrated system over another.

144 Guiding Principles for the SWIRP 4. Lead locally within a regional, state, national, andglobal framework: By setting local goals that meet or exceed State and National goals; By considering impactsof policies of other governments within the region; By finding solutions that are consistent with the branding ofthe communityandlocalbusinesses; and While not adversely impacting existing County legal, financial or contractual obligations.

145 Goals for the SWIRP 1. Adopt a streamlined reporting process to better track where Target Waste is generated and being delivered, by (Reporting process to address State requirements at a minimum, but may go further to address County goals.) 2. Establish a baseline of permitted square footage vs. C&D disposed in the County by end of Reduce the baseline C&D disposed per permitted square footage by 10%, by 2014; by 20% by 2016; by 30% by 2018; and by 40% by Divert Target Wastes by 40% by December 31, 2012, 50% by December 31, 2014, 60% by December 31, 2016, 70% by December 31, 2018, and 75% by December 31, (State goals)

146 Potential Strategies Discussion Advantages and disadvantages Economic impacts Potential for achieving of goals Diversion potential

147 Improve Reporting Improve tracking of generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, haulers, and/or destination facility data Use building permit process and/or C&D ordinance to require private developers, C&D contractors, others generating Class III and C&D materials to report the quantities diverted and disposed to the Countyupon upon completion of projects Require all registered C&D waste haulers to submit annual reports to the County that include: Amount of materials collected by type Destination facility Amount of documented diversion at the facility

148 Job Site C&D Diversion Plan Adopt and implement C&D diversion ordinance that includes requirement to prepare p a diversion plan and divert a certain percentage of materials from construction and demolition projects Diversionplan to be submitted with projects requiring a building permit Deposit required to be paid at time of permit issuance based on the size and scope of project with all or part to be refunded on pro rated basis once evidence of diversion is submitted OR require permit holder to pay pyprorated non compliance fee if minimum diversion thresholds are not met during course of the project Review fees, forfeited deposits, andnon compliance Review fees, forfeited deposits, and non compliance fees could be used to fund the program

149 C&D Pre-Processing Adopt and implement C&D diversion ordinance that requires pre processing prior to disposal Recommended by FDEP in 2010 and adopted as amendment to FL Statute 403. Includes extent economically feasible clause Local ordinance to mirror FL Statute and FAC Rules while clarifying criteria to be used at local level for determining if pre processing is required Define general thresholds for economic feasibility (e.g. remaining facility capacity and expected tdlif life) Require facilities to submit documentation on feasibility/infeasibility of pre processing Minimum percentages of materials required to be diverted during pre processing Example: 25% total; or 75% of metals and 55% of concrete Affected facilities allowed adjustment/implementation period to reach less aggressive interim i goals

150 Landfill Ban for Certain Materials Establish ordinance that bans disposal of certain types of materials Identify materials with sufficient recycling potential Establish maximum allowable percentages of components in loads tipped at landfills Would need to be cooperative effort between County and local municipalities Would encourage recycling or composting of banned materials andencourage facilities to create incentives for haulers/waste producers to remove the banned recyclable materials from the waste stream Facilities would haveoption to either set up recycling Facilities would have option to either set up recycling program for banned materials received or create incentives for haulers/waste generators to separate recyclables prior to delivery to facility

151 Building Contractor Education Develop educational information and outreach methods to inform contractors of alternatives to landfill disposal of their C&D waste Illustrate environmental and economic value of C&D recycling andprovide informationonlocal on resources and alternatives such as: Green building practices focused on waste reduction Deconstructionction On site source separation Recycling at mixed waste or C&D processing facilities Local lc&d ordinances, resources, or incentive programs

152 C&D Disposal Surcharge Surcharge for landfill disposal of C&D debris Funds could be utilized to support other strategies for implementation Would be most effective as cooperative effort with local municipalities in order to be consistent throughout the County, and pool resources for funding consistent public education efforts

153 C&D Diversion Policies to Encourage Diversion Viable alternative to ordinance if resources necessary to fully implement an ordinance are not available Can be used as a "stepping stone moving toward an ordinance requiring diversion Can includeadopting procedures that encourage diversion of C&D materials such as: Structural or financial incentives Reducing permitting hurdles Encouraging local end use

154 Establish Incentive Program for Haulers Modifications to existing C&D hauler licensing procedures Provide incentives for C&D diversion through commensurate license fee decreases or rebates (or disincentives with commensurate fee increases for disposal versus recycling) Would require annual reporting on the part of the haulers Rebate Strategy Provide rebates to haulers or contractors for the delivery of C&D material to recycling facilities Levels of recyclables delivered to facilities would be documented and communicated to County which would issue rebates Vl Voluntary Needs to be coupled with a revenue generating strategy

155 Appendix E: Strategies Ranking Matrix and Memorandum

156 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

157 MEMORANDUM To: Cc: From: David Bromfield, Orange County EPD; File Rick Wilson, EPIC Allison Trulock, HDR Date: March 30, 2012 Subject: Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan - Strategies Ranking Matrix (Task 6) The purpose of this memo is to describe the attached matrix, which presents eight potential management strategies that have been identified through the County s ongoing project to develop a Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP) that targets Class III solid waste, including construction and demolition debris (C&D). The strategies were recently presented to a stakeholder group of approximately 25 people, which included representatives from public and private industry, including state and local government representatives, generators, haulers, processors, and disposal facility representatives. Approximately 34% of the attendees were state and local government representatives, 18% were disposal facility representatives, another 18% were processors, 15% were haulers, 12% were consultants, and 3% were generators. The meeting was held in the Orange County Commission Chambers on February 28, The purpose of the stakeholder meeting was to foster discussion with the group regarding each of the potential management strategies and to obtain feedback that would assist the County and HDR in refining the final strategy recommendations that will be included in the SWIRP document. The strategies presented and discussed during the stakeholder meeting, and their ranking based on the attached matrix, were as follows: Strategy 1. Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data 2. Require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans, require at least 50% diversion requirement Ranking 1 st (tie) 1 st (tie) 3. Require C&D pre-processing prior to disposal 2 nd 4. Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials 3 rd (tie) 5. Building contractor education 4 th 6. C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) 3 rd (tie) 7. Adopt policies that strongly encourage C&D diversion 3 rd (tie) HDR ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 1 OF 4

158 MEMORANDUM MARCH 30, 2012 Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan - Strategies Ranking Matrix (Task 6) (continued) 8. Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers 3 rd (tie) Descriptions of each of these strategies can be found in the SWIRP Draft Management Strategies document that was provided to all stakeholder meeting participants. It should be noted that there were originally 10 potential strategies that were developed by HDR and County staff. However, two of the strategies (solid waste industry education and requiring the use of recycled materials in construction) were eliminated from the list of potential strategies based on internal evaluation and discussions prior to the stakeholder meeting. These particular strategies were determined to have a relatively poor potential for diversion success, difficulties related to implementation, or inconsistencies with the guiding principles. Each of the eight strategies presented to the stakeholder group are listed in the attached matrix and have been evaluated and given a numerical score based on nine individual criteria that were derived primarily from the stated Vision, Guiding Principles, and Goals for this project, as well as discussions with County staff. The criteria also take into consideration the stakeholder feedback received and various administrative and economic considerations that have been identified as important factors during the course of the project. In order to assist the County and HDR in short-listing the five or six strategies that will be most effective in addressing diversion of the target waste type, participants in the stakeholder meeting were asked to indicate which strategies they felt would be least effective in reaching the goals of the SWIRP. The evaluation criteria used in the attached matrix are as follows: Streamline reporting process Improve tracking of generation and processing/disposal Achieve State goals for diverting C&D waste Market development Financial impact on County Financial impact on users Administrative and legal complexity Energy conservation and renewable energy Stakeholder input regarding least effective strategies The strategies were assigned a score of one point, two points, or three points for each of the criteria depending on how well it met the identified criterion. The standards for assigning a score based on each criterion are specifically defined within the matrix. Each of the strategies was scored relative to one another. Based on the resulting matrix scores for each of the eight potential management strategies and feedback received during the stakeholder meeting, HDR has narrowed the list of strategies down to a total of five that will be further evaluated as part of the final SWIRP document. Certain strategies were combined where appropriate, while others have been identified as policies that the County should promote adoption at the State level, but not specifically address at the County level. Finally, one strategy was removed from the list entirely, as it was determined to be redundant with one of the other recommended strategies. The following presents a brief discussion regarding each strategy: 1. Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data HDR ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 2 OF 4

159 MEMORANDUM MARCH 30, 2012 Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan - Strategies Ranking Matrix (Task 6) (continued) o The HDR team recommends this strategy be further evaluated as part of the SWIRP due to the high score it received based on the various criteria in the matrix and its perceived high-level of effectiveness by the stakeholder group as compared to other strategies. 2. Require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans, require at least 50% diversion: o The HDR team recommends that this strategy be further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document due to the high score it received based on the various criteria in the matrix and its perceived high-level of effectiveness by the stakeholder group as compared to other strategies. The HDR team also recommends that this strategy be combined with Strategies 5 and 7, as Strategy 7 (Adopt policies that strongly encourage C&D diversion) would be an excellent stepping stone toward the eventual adoption of a C&D diversion ordinance that requires job site C&D debris diversion plans (Strategy 2). In addition, Strategy 5 (building contractor education) is a natural fit with the requirement to prepare C&D diversion plans, as a good deal of industry education will need to take place before, during and after adoption of such a requirement. 3. Require C&D pre-processing prior to disposal: o The HDR team does not recommend that this strategy be further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document primarily due to the fact that it is made largely unnecessary by the recommendation to require job site C&D diversion plans (Strategy 2). 4. Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials: o The HDR team recommends that the County promote this strategy for adoption at the State or regional level. However, we do not recommend that the County pursue this strategy alone. o The strategy received a fairly high score based on the criteria identified in the matrix, but was seen as the least effective of the eight proposed strategies by the stakeholder group. 5. Building contractor education: o The HDR team recommends that this strategy be combined with Strategies 2 and 7, and further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document due the overwhelming consensus it received from the stakeholder group. 6. C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee): o The HDR team recommends that this strategy be further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document based on the fact that it has the potential to provide a needed revenue source for implementation of some of the other recommended strategies. 7. Adopt policies that strongly encourage C&D diversion: o The HDR team recommends that this strategy be combined with Strategies 2 and 5, and further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document due to its perceived high-level of effectiveness by the stakeholder group as compared to other strategies. 8. Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers: o HDR recommends that this strategy be further evaluated as part of the SWIRP document due to the fairly high score it received based on the various criteria in the matrix. Based on the above discussion, the final list of recommended strategies for further evaluation includes the following five strategies: HDR ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3 OF 4

160 MEMORANDUM MARCH 30, 2012 Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan - Strategies Ranking Matrix (Task 6) (continued) Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data Adopt policies that strongly encourage C&D diversion, require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans including a 50% diversion requirement, and educate building contractors Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials to be promoted at the state and/or regional level C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers HDR ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 4 OF 4

161 Evaluation Criteria Streamline reporting process Improve tracking of generation and processing/disposal Achieve State goals for diverting C&D waste Market development Financial impact on County Financial impact on users Administrative and legal complexity Energy conservation and renewable energy Stakeholder input regarding least effective strategies Key Questions Strategy #1: Improve reporting requirements to track generation and recycling/disposal of Class III waste through building permits, Class III haulers, and/or facility data Strategy #2: Require job site C&D Debris Diversion Plans and a minimum of 50% diversion Strategy #3: Require C&D pre processing prior to disposal Strategy #4: Landfill ban for certain types of C&D materials Strategy #5: Building contractor education Strategy #6: C&D disposal surcharge (community host fee) Strategy #7: Adopt policies that strongly encourage C&D diversion Strategy #8: Establish a C&D recycling incentive program for waste haulers Does the strategy streamline reporting processes? 3 High impact on streamlining reporting 2 Marginal impact on streamling reporting Little impact or possible negative impact on streamlining reporting 1 Does the strategy help the County better track where C&D debris is generated and processed/disposed? 3 Tracking of materials is significantly improved Tracking of materials is somewhat improved 2 1 Tracking of materials is not improved Does the strategy help the County achieve the State's goal of diverting 40% by 2012, 50% by 2014, 60% by 2016, 70% by 2018, and 75% by 2020? (reduce C&D disposed per square foot) 3 Significant impact on ability to meet State goals Moderate impact on ability to meet State goals Minimal impact on ability to meet State goals 1 1 Does the strategy encourage development of new markets for C&D materials? 3 Significant impact on the development of new markets Moderate impact on the development of new markets No impact on the development of new markets 1 1 Does the strategy have an impact on the financial obligations of the County? 3 Positive financial impact on County 3 2 No financial impact on County Negative financial impact on County Does the strategy have a financial impact on users? 3 Positive financial impact on users 3 2 Little or no financial impact on users Negative financial impact on users What is the level of administrative and legal complexity associated with implementing and maintaining this strategy? 3 Low level of administrative and legal complexity Moderate level of administrative and legal complexity 2 1 High level of administrative and legal complexity How much impact does the strategy have on energy conservation or renewable energy? 3 Significant impact on energy conservation and/or renewable energy 2 Moderate impact on energy conservation and/or renewable energy Minimal impact on energy conservation and/or renewable energy Do stakeholders believe the strategy will be effective in helping to achieve the County's goals of streamlining reporting, improving tracking, and reducing disposal of C&D debris? (Points: 0 5 most effective; 6 10 moderately effective; least effective) Scoring by Strategy 3 Received 0 5 points from stakeholder group Received 6 10 points from stakeholder group Received points from stakeholder group 1 Overall Score

162 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

163 Appendix F: Lee County Waste Management Plan Form

164 This page intentionally left blank to facilitate double-sided printing.

165 Lee County Lee County Solid Waste Division Construction and Demolition Debris Debris Management Plan (239) (239) (fax) SOUTHWEST FLORIDA Lee County requires that all covered projects as defined under Ordinance recycle 50 percent of waste generated at the permitted site. Recycled material must be taken to County approved facilities. This plan is intended to provide guidance in meeting the requirements of the recycling ordinance. Construction and Demolition (C&D) represents approximately one-third of all waste generated in the State of Florida. C&D waste includes the materials that are generated in the construction, renovation and demolition of residential and commercial buildings. To better satisfy the County s goal for an integrated waste management system, to preserve natural resources and save on regional landfill space, contractors must carefully consider alternatives to landfill disposal. Salvaging, reusing, and recycling of C&D materials can reduce disposal costs as well as create jobs in the community. C&D Recycling Steps for Compliance Step 1: Estimate the volume or weight of Project C&D materials. Conversion tables are available form the County to assist in generating this information. Besides the contractor s job experience regarding waste generation, the Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, in a 2002 study, indicated that the typical residential home will generate 8.95 pounds/sq. ft for a block frame home and 4.32 pounds/sq. ft for a wood frame home. Component % of total Concrete 50 Wood 15 Drywall 20 Cardboard 3 Other 12 * data presented is for a concrete block frame Step 2: Estimate the volume or weight of C&D materials that it is feasible to divert via reuse or recycling. Based on the type of construction, list the types of materials to be generated. Take care to consider specific categories that are recyclable such as: Concrete, Wood, Metal, Paper/cardboard, Roofing tiles, Roofing shingles, Plastic, and Drywall. Use recommended conversion factors to estimate the volume or weight and record this information for future use. Step 3: Designate the vendors or facilities that the applicant proposes to use to collect, divert, market, reuse or receive the C&D materials. The County has published information on our website regarding facilities that accept separated materials or commingled materials for recycling. Other suggestions include on site use of debris for clean fill or reuse at other projects. Step 4: Estimate the volume or weight of residual (waste) C&D materials for disposal. Once the total proposed to be diverted, reused or recycled has been identified, calculate the remaining portion that is to be disposed. Step 5: Collect Documentation during the Project. Documentation should include pre-project estimates, gate receipts from approved recycling facilities, gate receipts from disposal facilities (including transfer stations) as well as any other documentation that can assist in evaluating the project s compliance with the C&D recycling provisions (i.e. picture of clean fill use, lumber used for other jobs, onsite mulching of wood, etc.). Documentation would also include any approved exemptions from the ordinance requirements that were approved by the Solid Waste Division Director. Step 6: Submit completed information to the Solid Waste Division to clear permits for final inspections and issuance or Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy, as applicable. Completed information should include: Completed and signed Certification form Completed C&DMMP o Material Handling Worksheet Executed Exemption form (if applicable) Supporting Documentation

166 Lee County Solid Waste Division Construction and Demolition Debris Material Handling Worksheet (239) (239) (fax) Column A: List Estimated Quantities of waste for each material type (in tons). To convert yards to tons, use the County Approved Materials Conversion Worksheet. Columns B, C, D: List estimated quantities reused, recycled, or disposed based on Column A quantities. Column E: State the name of all vendors or facilities used to reuse, recycle or dispose of materials listed. See examples below for cases where more than one facility was used for a particular material type. Column Totals: Add up all material quantities for each column. Diversion Percentage Estimate: Calculate the estimated diversion percentage and insert this on the appropriate space on the Project Certification Form. If this number is less than 50%, submit a project Exemption Form for review prior to submitting final paperwork. Materials A Total Quantity Generated B Salvaged or Reused C Recycled D Disposed (Landfill) Example: Cardboard 2 tons Asphalt and Concrete Brick/Masonry/Tile Building Materials Cardboard Carpet/Padding/Foam Ceiling Tiles Drywall Wood Metals Landscape Debris (do not include dirt) Dirt Garbage/Trash Appliances Mixed Debris* E Proposed Destination(s) Recycle XYZ Recycling Facility Disposal Gulf Coast Landfill Other Column Totals A B C D * Mixed debris for recycling may only be included if the destination facility is a County Approved mixed debris recycling facility. Diversion Percentage Estimate Calculation Column Totals + = = X 100% = % B C A