HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2005 0302 CC REG ITEM 10EMOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
to. C.
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
Of A
AC11ON:
BY: 1!h
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: John Brand, Senior Management Analyst?
DATE: February 23, 2005 (CC Meeting of March 2, 2005)
SUBJECT: Consider 2003 Annual AB 939 Solid Waste Diversion Report
to the Integrated Waste Management Board
SUMMARY
The Council is being asked to receive and file the 2003 Annual
Report for AB 939 solid waste diversion. The report uses the
Electronic Annual Report format developed by the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to calculate the
diversion (recycling) rate in the City. The result is a 2003 Annual
Report showing a diversion rate of 52% for the City of Moorpark. If
approved by the CIWMB, the City will comply with state law by
meeting the 50% diversion requirement for cities and counties.
BACKGROUND
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939)
established goals to divert solid waste from landfills. Each City
and County was required to do a Solid Waste Generation Study and
implementation plans called the Source Reduction and Recycling
Element (SRRE), Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE), and Non -
Disposal Facility Element (NDFE). The documents were completed in
1991.
The Solid Waste Generation Study and its associated elements (SRRE,
HHWE, and NDFE) established the basis to measure the progress
achieved by the AB 939 programs adopted by the City. Jurisdictions
had to divert 25% of their waste stream from landfills by 1995, and
50% beginning in 2000. Thereafter, 50% diversion rate must be
maintained for a jurisdiction to stay in compliance with the law.
Jurisdictions that fail to meet their diversion goals and fail to
demonstrate a good -faith effort may be fined up to $10,000 per day
by the state.
000281L
2003 AB 939 Annual Report
CC Meeting of March 2, 2005
Page 2
"Solid Waste Generation" means solid waste disposal plus solid
waste diversion. Disposal is usually burial of trash in a sanitary
landfill. It can also be incineration. Solid waste diversion
consists of: source reduction (waste minimization, such as saving
paper with two -sided copies); recycling; re -use; composting; and
transformation (waste to energy conversion, biofuel, etc.)
Moorpark's 1990 starting point was a 15.3% diversion rate. The
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) reviews the
Annual Reports of each city and county every other year, in a
biennial review process. The 2003 Annual Report will be reviewed by
the CIWMB after the 2004 Annual Report is submitted next year.
Additionally, state agencies (including school and community
colleges districts) are also required to submit Annual Reports on
diversion to the CIWMB.
The CIWMB is refining the Disposal Reporting System and draft new
Disposal Reporting System (DRS) regulations are being reviewed by
staff. One obvious problem with the DRS is that a refuse truck
driver may not know the precise jurisdictional boundaries of an
individual collection route. Statewide, haulers are reluctant to
divulge too much customer information for proprietary reasons. The
new DRS regulations attempt to resolve this issue. For example, the
landfill tonnage from the City's franchise haulers accounts for 80%
of the total tons reported by the Simi Valley Landfill that come
from Moorpark. The remaining 20% is called "self haul ". A certain
amount of self haul will always occur. However, comprehensive
estimates of what a city's self haul rate should be are not
available. It is not clear if the 20% self haul rate that the
landfill has been reporting in recent years is accurate for
Moorpark. For 2003, City and County staff have confirmed that 476
tons (out of 34,043) were reported as City of Moorpark tonnage when
they actually belonged to the County of Ventura (see Attachment
"D "). Staff is asking the CIWMB to give the City a Disposal
Reduction Credit for that amount. Staff believes it is worth
examining the self haul tonnages more closely and the Simi Valley
Landfill has been extremely cooperative as staff investigates the
origins of self hauled tons that have been attributed to Moorpark.
The Adjustment Factors and the Disposal Reporting System must also
be able to take into consideration sudden changes in economic
activity and natural disasters. Properly documented disaster tons
do not count as disposal. This is to prevent a non - recurring event
like a disaster from lowering a city or county's diversion rate.
000282
2003 AB 939 Annual Report
CC Meeting of March 2, 2005
Page 3
Staff from Moorpark and the County, working with the Simi Valley
Landfill and Recycling Center tracked disaster - related waste from
the 2003 `Simi Fire" and from the recent "2005 Winter Storms ".
There were 314 tons landfilled from the 2003 "Simi Fire" included
in Moorpark's tonnage in the Disposal Reporting System for 2003.
Staff is also asking for a Disposal Reduction Credit for those
tons. (Conversely, disaster waste that is diverted from landfills
does not improve the City's diversion rate for the year.) A
similar, but much smaller, adjustment may be included to account
for disaster tons landfilled because of the "2005 Winter Storms"
(see Attachment "D ").
The CIWMB's efforts to "readjust" Adjustment Factors are expected
to be in place in time for the 2004 Annual Reports. New DRS
regulations are being promulgated and their full impact may not be
apparent until the 2005 or 2006 Annual Reports.
Along a similar line to achieve greater accuracy, in 2001 the
Council authorized a new base year study to update the original
Solid Waste Generation Study prepared in 1991. In February 2003,
the CIWMB approved Moorpark's new Solid Waste Generation Study
establishing 2000 as the new base year. Additional diversion
activity documented in the new base year Solid Waste Generation
Study determined that Moorpark's diversion rate was 50% in 2000,
meeting the mandate of AB 939.
DISCUSSION
If the two Disposal Reduction Credits mentioned above are approved
by the CIWMB, then the City's 2003 diversion rate will be 520. If
for some reason they are not approved, then the City's 2003
diversion rate will be 50 %. Either figure complies with AB 939.
An examination of Moorpark's solid waste performance may be an
example of the need for the CIWMB to improve the accuracy of the AB
939 tracking system. In Moorpark as in other places, local data on
recycling activity (see charts in Attachment "A ") suggest that
participation in the residential curbside diversion program has
improved more than the Adjustment Factors reflect. The chart shows
graphically that there was a significant change in 2003 regarding
residential diversion increases and disposal decreases within the
City's curbside program. Residential curbside diversion went from
41% in 2002 to 50% in 2003. It is interesting to note that the time
of this big jump in curbside commingled and yard waste recycling
000283
2003 AB 939 Annual Report
CC Meeting of March 2, 2005
Page 4
diversion corresponds to the time when automated collection was
implemented in the City.
The first chart on page one of Attachment "A" shows the annual
residential curbside percentage. Residential diversion held a flat
growth trend, a spike in 2000, and a large increase in 2003. The
second chart on page two of Attachment "A" shows the same data on a
quarterly basis, with an additional line showing disposal. This
view illustrates the seasonal differences in diversion and
disposal. Those differences between quarters can be volatile. It
can be seen that in 2000 the diversion increase occurred largely in
the Spring (April - June) and Summer (July - September). Diversion
and disposal don't always appear to be mirror opposites. Although
generally, when one goes up the other goes down. The Autumn quarter
(October - December) typically shows a drop in diversion and an
increase in disposal, for example. The major increase in diversion
and decrease in disposal began when G.I. Industries automated 60%
of the households in December, 2002. Increases in diversion and
decreases in disposal continued to shift sharply as Moorpark
Rubbish Disposal phased in automated service. The City residential
sector was fully automated by June 30, 2003. After the 2003 Autumn
seasonal drop in diversion, indications are that the growth in
curbside diversion continued somewhat more moderately through 2004.
A different look at the same data is shown in the table in
Attachment "B ". In this table, the data is shown as pounds per
household per month. Looking at the data this way removes the
possibility that population growth could account for the change. It
also shows that the average household dramatically increased their
curbside commingled and yard waste recycling diversion in 2003. It
is a real credit to the community that in 2003 the average
household increased commingled recycling by thirteen pounds (13)
per month, increased yard trimmings diversion by twenty seven (27)
pounds per month, and reduced landfill disposal by twenty -three
(23) pounds per month. Residents were able to make those
improvements even as overall solid waste generation increased
sixteen (16) pounds per household per month.
Even though the residential waste stream makes up only 38% of the
City's total solid waste generation, improvements of this magnitude
in the 2003 curbside program might have been expected to have had
more impact on the City's total diversion rate. In other words, if
38% of the total improved from 41% to 50 %, all other things being
equal one might expect the overall diversion rate to have raised to
000284
2003 AB 939 Annual Report
CC Meeting of March 2, 2005
Page 5
about 54 %, instead of staying at 52 %, the same as 2002. The
phenomenon where the Adjustment Factors and Disposal Reporting do
not seem to be able to keep up with changing conditions is
occurring statewide. As indicated, the CIWMB is making changes for
greater accuracy.
Another component of the CIWMB's effort to ensure AB 939 compliance
by jurisdictions is to track diversion programs adopted by the
jurisdiction. The CIWMB maintains a list of a city or county's AB
939 programs in their Planning Annual Report Information System
(PARIS). A city or county's list of PARIS programs is used by the
CIWMB as one of its tools to measure a jurisdiction's "good faith
efforts" towards AB 939 compliance. Moorpark currently is shown in
PARIS as having 39 programs. Over the years, the state has created
new program categories for which the City may qualify. For example,
there is now a "Disaster Debris" category. Staff has identified
seven categories that appear could be added to Moorpark's PARIS
file by identifying the programs in an Electronic Annual Report.
These categories proposed to be added in this year's report are:
• Household Hazardous Waste "Curbside" Collection. The City of
Moorpark expanded "bulky item pick up" to include electronic
waste (ewaste) banned from landfills as hazardous. Residents
can have up to four (4) ewaste or bulky items collected
curbside each year.
• Disaster Debris. The City of Moorpark and the Simi Valley
Landfill and Recycling Center developed protocols to segregate
and quantify disaster debris such as that which occurred in
the 2003 "Simi Fire." Materials that could be diverted from
landfills were diverted.
• Food Waste Composting. The City of Moorpark buys vermicompost
bins and resells them to residents at a reduced rate, and
provides information and instructions on how to compost food
waste using worms.
• Government Recycling Programs. Workstations at City of
Moorpark offices are provided small wire baskets for
collecting waste office paper and other recyclable materials
generated in city government offices.
000285
2003 AB 939 Annual Report
CC Meeting of March 2, 2005
Page 6
• Product and Landfill Bans. The City of Moorpark changed waste
handling instructions to reflect "Universal Waste Rule"
prohibitions against landfill disposal of batteries, light
tubes, mercury containing devices, etc.
• Scrap Metal. The City of Moorpark added scrap metal dealers to
its list of local recycling centers, and established contact
with manufacturers in Moorpark to assist in diversion of scrap
metals.
• Household Hazardous Waste Materials Exchange. The City of
Moorpark actively promotes CalMax and local VCMax (Ventura
County) materials exchange directories to divert re- usable
household hazardous waste from disposal. Materials exchange
programs are promoted by providing information to residents
and businesses in City newsletters, and on utility bills.
Upon the City's request, the CIWMB will review these program
updates to make sure they are appropriate programs designations and
that there are no duplications. The complete program list is
included in Attachment "C ", a printout of the 2003 Electronic
Annual Report (EAR) for the City of Moorpark. Attachment "D" is the
City Reporting Year Tonnage Modification Request and Certification,
which describes the 476 tons misallocated to the City and the 314
ton of disaster debris that resulted from the 2002 "Simi Fire."
As a City that is near the 50% compliance threshold, having more
programs in the PARIS program will be a mitigating factor should
the City dip below 50% for a year or so.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive and File.
Attachment "A ":
Attachment "B ":
Attachment "C ":
Attachment "D ":
Charts of Residential Curbside Solid Waste
Diversion Percentage 1997 -2003
Table of Household Monthly Curbside Averages
in Pounds
CIWMB Electronic Annual Report (EAR) - Summary
Reporting Year Tonnage Modification Request
and Certification
000286
O
O
O
0�
Residential Curbside Diversion Percentage
Annual: 1997 - 2004
55%
53%
?
51%
i
€
49%
- - -- --
C
45%
- - -- — - -— - --
d
a
43%
41 %
- -- -- - - --
39%
-- - - - -- - — —
i
37%
1
's
35%
i
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year
Diversion
curbside percentage detail.xls Curbside All Chart 6
a
rt
rt
W
m
rt
a
m
1
t.
Residential Curbside Diversion & Disposal Percentage
Quarterly: 1997- 2004
65%
63% • { - -- -- - -
57% - -- - •
55% -
■
53% - -- - - - •�
•
•
C 51%
Ik
a 49% - - - -- --
47% -
45% - --
43% -
41% - - - -- --
39% --
37%
35%
Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer- Winter- Summer-
97 97 98 98 99 99 00 00 01 01 02 02 03 03 04 04
Year: Quarter
Diversion - - - Disposal
curbside percentage detail.xls Curbside All & Disposal All Chart 2
9
rt
rt
W
n
m
rt
9
b
w
m
Attachment "B"
Per Household Monthly Curbside Averages in Pounds
000289
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Recycled
70.77
77.36
73.20
78.46
75.20
75.05
87.85
Yard
55.34
65.25
67.07
74.02
66.64
68.49
95.19
Disposed
211.83
232.35
223.82
214.92
221.42
207.88
184.42
Generated
1 337.94
374.97
1 364.10
1 367.41
1 363.26
351.42
367.46
Diversion %
37%
38%
39%
42%
39% —P41%
1 50%
000289
Attachment "C"
City of Moorpark
AB 939 Electronic Annual Report (EAR)
2003
Submitted to the
California Integrated Waste Management Board
February 18, 2005
00029'0
Attachment "C"
City of Moorpark
AB 939 Electronic Annual Report (EAR)
2003
Submitted to the
California Integrated Waste Management Board
February 18, 2005
000231L
Attachment "C" continued
City of Moorpark
AB 939 CIWMB
2003 Electronic Annual Report Summary
Report Year Filed: 2003
Jurisdiction: Moorpark
Jurisdiction Contact: JOHN BRAND
Address: 799 N MOORPARK AVE MOORPARK, CA 93021 -1155
Phone Number: (805) 517 -6248
Fax Number (805) 529 -8270
E -mail Address: jbrand @ci.moorpark.ca.us
Section A
A -1. Calculated Diversion Rate:
Base -Year: 2000
Base -Year Generation Amount (tons): 65,172
Base -Year Residential Generation Rate: 38%
Reporting -Year: 2003
Diversion Rate Requirement: 50%
Reporting -Year Disposal Amount (tons): 34,043
Reported Disaster Waste (tons): 314
Reported Medical Waste (tons): 0
Reported Regional Diversion Facility Residual Waste (tons): 0
Reported Out -of -State Export (Diverted) (tons): 0
Reported Transformation Waste (tons): 0
Reported Other Disposal Amount (tons): 476
Total Disposal Reduction Credit Amount Reported (tons): 0
Total Adjusted Reporting -Year Disposal Amount (tons):
33,253
Source
Base -Year
Reporting -Year
% Change
Population:
Jurisdiction
31,400
34,550
10.0%
Taxable Sales (x1000):
County
9,096,092
10,382,440
14.1%
Employment:
County
392,500
407,700
3.9%
Consumer Price Index:
State
174.8
190.4
8.9%
Change in Residential Sector ( %): 7.2%
Growth
Paget 000292
Attachment "C" continued
Change in Non - Residential Sector ( %):
Estimated Reporting -Year Generation Tonnage
Reporting -Year Diversion Rate ( %):
Diversion Rate Accuracy:
Question:
4.3% Growth
68,700
52%
1. Are there extenuating circumstances pertaining to your jurisdiction's diversion rate that
the Board should consider, as authorized by the Public Resources Code Section 41821(c). If
so, please use the space below to tell the Board. If you wish to attach additional information
to your annual report, please send those items or electronic files to your OLA
representative; include a brief description of those files below.
Jurisdiction's response:
Increases in residential diversion and decreases in residential disposal during 2003 do not
appear to be reflected by the Adjustment Factor calculation. Additional information will be
sent to Office of Local Assistance (OLA) representative.
A -2 Adjustment factors:
Population:
Taxable Sales:
Employment:
Consumer Price
Index:
Adjustment factor used
Jurisdiction
County
County
A -3 Calculation Method:
State
1. Requesting correction to existing base NO
year:
2. Requesting alternative disposal tonnage: NO
3. Requesting deductions to DRS disposal YES
tonnage:
4. Requesting Biomass diversion credits: NO
Source of adjustment factor
Not required
Not required
Not required
Not required
Based on these selections, you must fill out the following additional sheets
- Report Year Disposal Modification Certification Sheet
Reporting Year Modification Form submitted to CIWMB Office of Local Assistance, and is
attached. The attached form shows the misallocated tonnage and the disaster - related tonnage.
Page 3 000293
Attachment "C" continued
Section B
B1- SWGS needs revision: No
B2 - SRRE needs revision: No
B3 - HHWE needs No
revision:
B4 - NDFE
Changes in use of
nondisposal facilities:
NDFE needs revision: No
Section C
C -1 Existing SRRE and HHWE programs.
Program Program Name: P og s Target Sector:
11010- SR -BCM 1Backyard and On -Site Composting/Mulching I I N/A
1020- SR -B WR Business Waste Reduction Program N/A
1030-SR-P IProcurement N/A
1040- SR -SCH JISchool Source Reduction Programs N/A
1050- SR -GOV JFGovernment Source Reduction Programs IF N/A
1060- SR -MTE Material Exchange, Thrift Shops N/A Residential, Commercial,
Industrial
12000- RC -CRB 1Residential Curbside 11
9,454
(Residential 1
All Sectors: Residential,
1000- SR -XGC
Xeriscaping /Grasscycling
N/A
Commercial, Industrial,
lResidential
2030- RC -OSP Commercial On -Site Pickup
3,049
Government
11010- SR -BCM 1Backyard and On -Site Composting/Mulching I I N/A
1020- SR -B WR Business Waste Reduction Program N/A
1030-SR-P IProcurement N/A
1040- SR -SCH JISchool Source Reduction Programs N/A
1050- SR -GOV JFGovernment Source Reduction Programs IF N/A
1060- SR -MTE Material Exchange, Thrift Shops N/A Residential, Commercial,
Industrial
12000- RC -CRB 1Residential Curbside 11
9,454
(Residential 1
2010- RC -DRP Residential Drop -Off
N/A
lResidential
2020- RC -BYB IlResidential Buy -Back
lResidential
2030- RC -OSP Commercial On -Site Pickup
3,049
Commercial
2040- RC -SFH IlCommercial Self -Haul
lCommercial
12070-RC-SNL7lSpecial Collection Seasonal (regular)
IResidential
12080-RC-SPEJSpecial Collection Events
IResidential
3000- CM -RCG lResidential Curbside Greenwaste Collection
4,917
Residential
3010- CM -RSG Residential Self -haul Greenwaste
IResidential
3020 -CM -COG Commercial On -Site Greenwaste Pick -up
N/A
Commercial
3030- CM -CSG Commercial Self -Haul Greenwaste I
lCommercial, Industrial
3060- CM -GOV
Government Composting Programs
N/A
Government
Page 0002-04
Attachment "C" continued
5010- ED -PRN Print (brochures, flyers, guides, news articles) N/A Residential, Commercial,
Industrial, Government
5020 -ED -OUT
Outreach (tech assistance, presentations, awards,
field eld trips)
N/A
F sectors
5030- ED -SCH ISchools (education and curriculum) I N/A (School
6010 -PI -EIN I lEconomic Incentives lResidential
6020- PI -ORD Ordinances N/A Government
7000 -FR -MRF MRF N/A Residential, Commercial,
Industrial, Government
17010 -FR -LAN
7030- FR -C MF
7040 -FR -ADC
18020-TR-TRS Tires N/A All sectors
9000- HH -P MF Permanent Facility lResidential, Commercial
9010- HH -MPC I Mobile or Periodic Collection E:K/A 7771 Residenrial
9040 -HH -EDP Education Programs N/A Residential, Commercial,
Industrial
C -2 New SRRE and HHWE programs.
Program
Program Program Name Date Sector Tons
9020 -HH -CSC Curbside Collection =[2Kli Residential N/A
City expanded "bulky item pick up" to include electronic waste
New Program Description: (ewaste) banned from landfills. residents can have up to four (4)
ewaste or bulky items collected curbside each year.
4070- SP -DSD Disaster Debris 2003 All sectors 314
The City and the Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center
New Program Description: developed protocols to segregate and quantify disaster debris such
as that which occurred in the 2003 "Simi Fire."
3040- CM -FWC Food Waste Composting EK11 Residential N/A
The City buys vermicompost bins and resells them to residents at a
New Program Description: reduced rate, and provides information and instructions on how to
compost food waste using worms.
2060- RC -GOV Government Recvcling Prourams 1996 Government IF N/A
Page 5 000295
Attachment "C" continued
Section H - Additional Information
In 2003, the City of Moorpark achieved a significant increase in residential curbside diversion.
Curbside diversion rose from 41% in 2002 to 50% in 2003. This occurred after the City of
Moorpark implemented a bilingual public education campaign in conjunction with the
establishment of automated collection. Every household received three carts: a gray cart for
"single stream" commingled recyclables; a green cart for yard trimmings; and a blue cart for
discarded solid waste. See Residential Curbside Graphs.
Page 6 000296
Workstations at City offices are provided small wire baskets for
New Program Description:
collecting waste office paper and other recyclable materials
generated in city government offices.
6000 -Pt -P Product and Landfill Bans 2003 All sectors N/A
City changed waste handling instructions to reflect Universal Waste
New Program Description• '
Rule and prohibitions against landfill disposal of batteries, light
tubes, mercury containing devices, etc.; and made sure these items
can be accepted at Household Hazardous Waste drop -offs.
4040-SP-SCM Commercial,
Scrap Metal 2003 Industrial
ity add ed scrap metal dealers to its list of local recycling centers,
New Program Description:
and established contact with manufacturers to assist is diversion of
scrap metals.
9030- HH -WSE Waste Exchange 1999 All sectors N/A
City actively promotes Ca1Max and local VCMax (Ventura County)
New Program Description:
materials exchange programs by providing information to residents
I[=
and businesses in City newsletters, and on utility bills.
Section H - Additional Information
In 2003, the City of Moorpark achieved a significant increase in residential curbside diversion.
Curbside diversion rose from 41% in 2002 to 50% in 2003. This occurred after the City of
Moorpark implemented a bilingual public education campaign in conjunction with the
establishment of automated collection. Every household received three carts: a gray cart for
"single stream" commingled recyclables; a green cart for yard trimmings; and a blue cart for
discarded solid waste. See Residential Curbside Graphs.
Page 6 000296
Attachment "D"
STATE OF CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
Reporting Year Disposal Tonnage Modification Request and Certification
(02 -02)
To request a change to your jurisdiction's reporting year disposal amount, please complete and sign this form and return it to your
Office of Local Assistance (OLA) representative at the address below. Please note that upon review of your request, OLA staff may
ask for additional information if the information provided in the form is not clear. OLA staff will review your request as part of the
Annual Report/Biennial Review process; therefore, it is recommended that this form be included as part of your Annual Report to the
California Integrated Waste Management Board (Board).
Please be advised that the Biennial Review is not only a review of whether a jurisdiction has met their diversion rate requirement, but
it is also an evaluation of a jurisdiction's progress in implementing the selected programs identified in their Source Reduction and
Recycling Element (SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Element.
If you have any questions about the certification process, or how to fill out this form, please call your OLA representative at
(916) 341- 6199.
Mail completed documents to:
California Integrated Waste Management Board
Office of Local Assistance (MS - 25)
10011 Street
P.O. Box 4025 (mailing address)
Sacramento, CA 958124025
General Instructions:
Please complete both Section I and Section 1I, and then all other applicable subsections.
Section 1: Jurisdiction Information and Certification
I certify under penalty of perjury that the information
in this document is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and that I
am authorized to make this certification on behalf of:
Jurisdiction Name
County
City of Moorpark
Ventura
Authorized Signature
Title
V", &,,Q,
Senior Management Analyst
Type /Pri Name of Person Signing
Date
Phone
John Brand
(:1- 19- 0 `)
(805) 517 -6248
Person Completing This Form (please print or type)
Title
Phone
Senior Management
(805) 517 -6248
John Brand
Analyst
Mailing Address
City
State
ZIP Code
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark
CA
93021
E -mail Address:
jbrand @ci.moorpark.ca.us
000297
1 of 7
11 11
Section II: Information for Modification of Existing Reporting Year Disposal Tonnage
If requesting more than one type of reporting year disposal tonnage modification, please complete a separate subsection "A7" for
each type of modification and attach as A7-1, A7-2, etc., and complete all applicable subsections for each reporting year
inaccuracy selected in A5.
Al. Reporting Year to be
A2. Current Disposal
A3. Increased or Decreased
A4. Proposed Total Reporting
Corrected:
Tonnage as Reported To
Tons Requested:
Year Disposal Tons
The Board:
Requested:
2003
34,043
-790
33,253
A5. Statute (PRC sections 41031- 41033, 41331 - 41333), Regulation (14CCR sections 18722 et seq., 18800 et seq), and Board
Policy (modification methods as outlined in the March 27, 1997 Board- approved "Agenda Item 32 ") allow for reporting year
disposal tonnage modifications. Please state the nature of the reporting year disposal tonnage inaccuracy by checking all that
apply. (Information regarding Statute, Regulations and 'Agenda Item 32 "are available on the Board's Web site at
www.ciwmb.ca.gov /Law.htm and at www. ciwmb. ca. gov /LgLibraNlPolicy/BaseYrChanpe/)
® Disposed waste actually generated in another jurisdiction (e.g., misallocated waste). Answer questions A6 A9.
476 tons see page 3 -1
❑ Disposal tonnage miscalculated. (This could be a 100% audit of hauler and self -haul tonnage in lieu of Disposal Reporting
System (DRS) disposal tonnage when correcting an existing, or establishing a new, base year.) Answer questions A6—A9.
❑ Non - hazardous designated waste tonnage or disposal mandated by federal or State agency policy, order, or contract
modification. Answer question AIO. Also, reference Board's Web page for Class H Policy Letter at
www. ciwmb. ca. cov /t.(ii-ibrarviPolicv /Class2.htm
® Waste disposal from a declared disaster or public emergency. (Reference: 14CCR, Art. 9.0, sec. 18794.0 (g), and
sec. 18794.2 (g) for disaster - related reporting requirements.) Answer questions A7 —A9 and All.
314 tons see pages'3 -2, 4
❑ Waste exported out of state and later diverted. (Reference 14CCR, Art. 9.2, sec. 18813 (c) (4) for additional information.)
Answer questions A7 —A9 and Al2.
❑ Residual waste from regional diversion facility. (Reference PRC section 41782 (a) (2), (b) and (c) for additional disposal
tonnage modification requirements.) Answer questions A 7 —A9 and Sections III, IV and V.
❑ Residual waste from regional medical waste treatment facility. (Reference PRC section 41782 (a) (1), (b) and (c) for
additional disposal tonnage modification requirements.) Answer questions A7 A9 and Sections III and V.
❑ C &D tonnage from a federal, state, or other agency project outside of a jurisdiction's control. Answer questions A7 —A9and
Section VI.
❑ Other reporting year disposal tonnage inaccuracy not specifically outlined in statute, or "Agenda Item 32." Please explain in
detail below, including your proposed tonnage modification method. Answer questions A7 —A9.
2of7 000298
Attachment "n" lr,,.. , - ...,,.4"
A6.a. (Answer only if you are claiming a misallocation or miscalculation.) Please explain the basis for the misallocation or
miscalculation claim, i.e., why is the disposal tonnage reported through the Board's DRS not correct? Attach documentation
that demonstrates the misallocation or miscalculation.
b. Please indicate below:
Correct jurisdiction of origin: Ventura County unincorporated area
Landfill operator: Simi Valley Landfill & RecylinQ Center, (Waste Management Inc) SWIS• 56 -AA -0007
Reporting county: Ventura
c. How has the misallocation or miscalculation problem been resolved so that the error does not reoccur?
Improved hauler tonnage tracking, and City of Moorpark requested that County add a "Moorpark Unincorporated" subcatego
to its Disposal Reporting System forms.
d. Parties affected by this misallocation or miscalculation claim (e.g., jurisdiction[s]), hauler[s], county[s] or landfill
operator[s]) should be notified in writing regarding the problem and your pending claim to the Board. Attach a copy of the
notification letter(s) sent. The notification letter should identify the problem claimed in subsection A5, tonnage amount
claimed. This should give the basis for determining the correct jurisdiction of origin or disposal calculation (including any
substantiating documentation), and a proposal for correcting/addressing the problem.
AT In the table below, list the data records that support your claim and are available for Board review. For example, weight
tickets from a transfer station or a signed letter on official letterhead indicating where the waste tonnage originated
(i.e. jurisdiction of origin).
Source of Disposal Data
Tons
Type of Record
Location of Data
A7 -1 - County of Ventura
476
County review of hauler
County of Ventura EERD
disposal activity
100 Hill Rd., Suite 100
Ventura, CA 93003
A8. What is your calculated diversion rate before and after the proposed change in disposal tonnage?
Reporting year: 2003
Current Board default diversion rate:50 %
Diversion rate using proposed disposal tonnage: 52 %
A9. If the proposed reporting year tonnage modification results in an increase in your waste diversion rate, please explain how
your diversion rate is consistent with your level of SRRE program implementation. For example, does your new diversion
percentage reflect the recycling and diversion programs you have implemented in your jurisdiction?
A 9 -1 Proposed diversion rate (52 %) is the same as Board aproved 2002 diversion rate. Concurrently, there was a significant
increase in residential curbside diversion in 2003 - from 41 % to 50 %.
000299
3 -1 of 7
Attachment "n" (6 nntin��o al
A6.a. (Answer only if you are claiming a misallocation or miscalculation.) Please explain the basis for the misallocation or
miscalculation claim, i.e., why is the disposal tonnage reported through the Board's DRS not correct? Attach documentation
that demonstrates the misallocation or miscalculation.
b. Please indicate below:
Correct jurisdiction of origin:
Landfill operator:
Reporting county:
c. How has the misallocation or miscalculation problem been resolved so that the error does not reoccur?
Improved hauler tonnage tracking„ and City requested that County add a "Moorpark Unincorporated" subcategory to DRS
forms.
d. Parties affected by this misallocation or miscalculation claim (e.g., jurisdiction[s]), hauler[s], county[s] or landfill
operator[s]) should be notified in writing regarding the problem and your pending claim to the Board. Attach a copy of the
notification letter(s) sent. The notification letter should identify the problem claimed in subsection A5, tonnage amount
claimed. This should give the basis for determining the correct jurisdiction of origin or disposal calculation (including any
substantiating documentation), and a proposal for correctingladdressing the problem.
AT In the table below, list the data records that support your claim and are available for Board review. For example, weight
tickets from a transfer station or a signed letter on official letterhead indicating where the waste tonnage originated
(i.e. jurisdiction of origin).
Source of Disposal Data
Tons
Type of Record
Location of Data
A 7 - 2 County of Ventura
314
Landfill scalehouse disaster
County of Ventura EERD
tracking system
100 Hill Rd., Suite 100
Ventura, CA 93003
A8. What is your calculated diversion rate before and after the proposed change in disposal tonnage?
Reporting year: 2003
Current Board default diversion rate:50 %
Diversion rate using proposed disposal tonnage: 52 %
A9. If the proposed reporting year tonnage modification results in an increase in your waste diversion rate, please explain how
your diversion rate is consistent with your level of SRRE program implementation. For example, does your new diversion
percentage reflect the recycling and diversion programs you have implemented in your jurisdiction?
A 9 - 2 Proposed diversion rate (52 %) is the same as Board aproved 2002 diversion rate. Disaster tonnage was not included in
base year.
3 -2 of 7 000300
Attachment "D" (Continued)
A 10.a. (Answer only if you are claiming a modification because of non - hazardous designated waste tonnage or disposal
mandated by federal or state agency policy or contract.) Please identify the material type and tonnage being claimed, and
explain why the landfill is prohibited from diverting the material. (Attach documentation showing tonnage claimed by material
type).
314 tons of debris from the 2003 "Simi Fire" was generated in Moorpark and disposed in the Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center
(SWIS 56 -AA -007). Fire debris included, but was not limited to, houses, outbuildings, fences, trees, dead animals, and foliage.
There is no local facility where this material could be diverted.
b. Describe your efforts to divert the non - hazardous designated waste material prior to this tonnage modification request.
City provided the public and affected property owners with information regarding natural plant regeneration to discourage wholesale
clearing of burned land. Hydorseeding, sandbagging and tarping of burned land was applied where appropriate to prevent
erosion. City building officials expidited safety inspections so that repair and reoccupation of structures could occur, preventing
the generation of additional disaster waste of partially burned structures due to exposure.
A I La. (Answer only if you are claiming waste disposal from a declared disaster or public emergency.) Describe the disaster
or emergency claimed below (e.g., fire, flood; month/year of disaster; who declared the disaster or emergency). (Also attach a
copy of official public notice of the disaster or emergency.)
The October 2003 "Simi Fire" destroyed six houses, damaged seven other houses and damaged outbuildings on nine additional
properties. The fire burned about 3,000 acres of orchards, ranch land, residential properties and open space within the City of
Moorpark. This disaster was declared by the City of Moorpark, the county of Ventura, the state of California, and the United
States of America. City resolution is attached.
b. Describe the diversion programs implemented to maximize diversion of disaster - related solid waste.
The City reviewed its zoning ordinances and development conditions of approval to ensure that the City building and landscaping
requirements are adequate to maximize fire prevention.
A 12. (Answer only if you are claiming out -of -state waste that was reported in the Disposal Reporting System that was later
diverted.) Describe the diversion program; e.g., responsible agency for the diversion, diversion program, reporting
information provided to substantiate the tonnage claimed.
Section III: Facility Information (Answer only if you are claiming residual waste from a regional diversion facility or
treated waste from a regional medical waste treatment facility.)
1. Facility name:
2. Facility location:
3. Total tons of residual waste disposed (for diversion facility): tons
Total tons of waste disposed (for medical waste treatment facility): tons
4. List the material types processed by the facility.
5. (Answer only if claiming a deduction for treated medical waste). List the jurisdictions contributing the non - treated medical
waste processed by the facility.
000301.
4of7
Attachment "D" (Continued)
Section IV: Regional Diversion Facility Qualification: (Answer only if you are claiming residual waste from a
regional diversion facility.)
1. Does the facility accept material from within the jurisdiction?
❑Yes If yes, go to question 2.
❑No If no, go to question 9.
2. Does the facility have a Solid Waste Facility Permit?
❑Yes If yes, go to question 9.
❑No If no, go to question 3.
3. List the jurisdictions that send waste to the regional diversion facility.
4. Explain how the material received by the facility was source - separated for the purpose of being processed prior to its arrival at
the facility.
5. How much residual waste is generated by the facility? % (of material received) tons
6. Is all residual waste a result of the recycling that takes place at the facility? Please explain. Note: Waste generated by the
facility that is not a result of the processing of the recycled material handled by the facility may not be included in the residual
claimed for deduction (e.g., waste from offices, lunch room, etc.)
7. Describe how the facility contributes to the regional effort to divert solid waste from disposal.
8. List and explain the factors that prevent the facility or jurisdiction from allocating the residual waste back to contributing
jurisdictions.
9. If you answered No to question 1, or Yes to question 2, your claim does not qualify for a deduction.
000302
5 of 7
Attachment- "D" VCnntim,ari)
000303
6of7
Attarhmant "n" (('nnt;n„ -Aa
Section VI: Construction and Demolition (C &D) Tonnage. (To be completed only if claiming a reporting year
deduction for disposal tonnage generated by a C &D project outside of the jurisdiction's control.)
1. Project Description.
a. Identify the project's controlling or lead agency (e.g., CalTrans, Bart).
b. Identify the jurisdiction(s) in which the project is occurring.
c. What is the project's start date: Projected end date:
d. Describe the project for which this claim is being made.
e. Explain why this project is outside your jurisdiction's control (e.g., while your jurisdiction has a C &D
recycling ordinance tied to building permits, the project's permit was not required to go through the local
permitting process).
2. Disposal Information.
a. Year for which this deduction is being claimed:
b. What is the disposal deduction tonnage being claimed? tons
c. Attach appropriate documentation showing tonnage claimed is from this project and generated within this
jurisdiction (e.g., landfilled weight tickets).
3. Efforts to Divert the C &D Waste.
a. Describe your efforts to divert the C &D waste from this project, including the barriers encountered, if any:
attach supporting documentation. The description may also be provided in a letter attached to this sheet.
b. Were the efforts to divert the C &D waste successful? Please explain.
7of7 000304
Attachment "D" (Continued)
county of ventura
February 7, 2005
John Brand
Sr. Management Analyst
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
RONALD C. COONS
Agency Director
R. REDDY PAKALA
Director
Water & Sanitation Department
Environmental & Energy Resources Division
Section Managers
Peter Kaiser
Pollution Prevention & Compliance
Gerard Kapuscik
Resources & Information Systems
Subject: Reallocation of Year 2003 Disposal Tons from the City of Moorpark
to the Unincorporated Area of Ventura County
Dear John:
The Ventura County Environmental and Energy Resources Division (EERD) is writing to inform you
that we have discovered a discrepancy regarding the correct jurisdiction of origin for 476 tons of
materials originally reported through DRS by G.I. Industries as having been disposed at the Simi
Valley Landfill and originating within the City of Moorpark during calendar year 2003. These disposal
tons actually originated in the unincorporated area of Ventura County, not the City of Moorpark.
This discrepancy was discovered during the performance of EERD's "due diligence" responsibilities
as countywide coordinator of the Disposal Reporting System (DRS) on behalf of Ventura County's
eleven jurisdictions. Specifically, we cross - checked disposal tonnage data contained in quarterly
hauler reports provided to EERD by franchise waste haulers with DRS reports provided by landfills.
After EERD's detailed review of the hauler's "best information" (i.e. its disposal records), for calendar
year 2003, both EERD, and GI Industries the affected hauler, concluded that the original information
regarding the City of Moorpark as the jurisdiction of origin for these disposal tons provided by G.I.
Industries to the Simi Valley Landfill was incorrect.
Please be advised that in accordance with applicable provisions found in Section 18800 et seq, of
Title 14 CCR, EERD plans on submitting a Disposal Modification Certification Form to the CIWMB,
with its Annual Report documenting the reallocation of 476 disposal tons from the City of Moorpark
to the unincorporated area of Ventura County during calendar year 2003.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me directly at (805) 289 -3106.
Sincerely,
Gerard Kapuscik, Manager
RIS Section, EERD
Pc: R.R. PAKALA, Director, Water and Sanitation Department, VCPWA
Gloria Silvestri - Whitcomb, DRS Reporting Coordinator
Maria Aram, Controller, Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center
Mike Smith, District Manager, G.I. Industries
1000 Hill Road, Suite 100 • Ventura, CA 93003 • (805) 289 -3333 • FAX (805) 2893102 • •j%wi.,,vasteless,o�rg �►00305
trn
Attachment "D" (Continued)
county of venture
February 8, 2005
John Brand
Sr. Management Analyst
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
RONALD C. COONS
Agency Director
R. REDDY PAKALA
Director
Water & Sanitation Department
Environmental & Energy Resources Division
Section Managers
Peter Kaiser
Pollution Prevention & Compliance
Gerard Kapuscik
Resources & Information Systems
SUBJECT: ANNUAL 2003 DISASTER DEBRIS TONNAGE DISPOSED AT THE
SIMI VALLEY LANDFILL REPORTED GENERATED IN THE CITY OF
MOORPARK
Dear John:
On November 5, 2003 the Ventura County Environmental and Energy Resources
Division (EERD) sent a memo to all contracted haulers regarding disaster debris
tonnage tracking measures. The memo requested each hauler's cooperatioh in
providing guidance and direction to their drivers to be sure that they notify scale houses
operators if they haul any disaster debris loads from Ventura County jurisdictions to
local processing facilities and permitted landfills.
In response to EERD's memo, the Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center reported
that it received 314 tons of disaster debris tons generated within the City of Moorpark
during calendar year 2003 (See Attached Information for Details).
Should you have any questions regarding this information, please feel free to call me
directly at (805),289-3115.
Sincerely,
Wama,-'
Gloria Silvestri - Whitcomb, DRS Reporting Coordinator
Ventura County Environmental and Energy Resources Division
Pc: Gerard Kapuscik, Manager, RIS Section, EERD
1000 Hill Road. Suite 100 + Venturraa_CA 93003 + i30 1 289 -3333 + FAX (8,`5.) 289-31,0) • ,.;v,,,w vwast, ess.orO00306
Attachment "D" (Continued
Simi Valley Landfill
4TH Quarter 2003 Daily Survey
Wildfire Tons
City of Simi:
Anderson Rubbish
Cash Customer
G.I. - Rolloff
Total City of Simi
City of Moorpark:
Burns Pacific Construction
Cash Customer
G.I. - Rolloff
Moorpark Commercial
Reed Landclearing
Total City of Moorpark
City of Oxnard:
G.I. - Rolloff
Unincorporated Ventura County:
G.I. - Rolloff
Total
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER DECEMBER
I
Total
7.85
14.87
3.90 26.62
1.99
1.99
844
1.77 10.21
7.85
25.30
5.67 38.82
10.23
10.23
0.67
7.28
7.95
56.78
65.54
122.32
12.57
56.08
68.65
104.97
104.97
70.02
244.10
- 314.12
3.82
3.82
11.73 11.53
77.87 284.75 5.67 368.29
000307