5. SOLID AND MODERATE RISK WASTE PLANNING HISTORY
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter of the Douglas County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (DCCSWMP) outlines the history of solid and moderate risk waste planning within the Regional Planning Area (RPA).
5.2 WASTE PLANNING HISTORY IN RPA
5.2.1 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans
Separate solid waste management plans for Chelan and Douglas Counties were adopted in 1972. Douglas County updated its solid waste management plan independently of Chelan County in 1975. In 1982, Chelan and Douglas Counties combined again to complete a regional solid waste management plan. The goal of the 1982 solid waste management plan was "to eliminate uneconomical, unhealthy and hazardous situations associated with waste disposal by developing an effective economical and totally coordinated waste management system that meets the present and future needs of the two-county area."
The following objectives were identified, in order for the goal to be accomplished:
- develop an acceptable solid waste management system of storage, collection, transportation, processing, disposal and recycling;
- develop better trained operators and managers by acquainting them with new techniques of operation, record keeping, equipment, etc.;
- develop a program to better inform the public of the need for a comprehensive solid waste management program;
- develop an organizational structure to coordinate all solid waste activities in the two-county area;
- develop new rules and regulations pertaining to sanitary standards as they apply to solid waste management.
With the adoption of the 1982 solid waste management plan, all public owned landfills within the region were scheduled to be closed to the public. All regional solid waste was directed to the Greater Wenatchee Regional Landfill and Recycling Facility (GWRLF), a privately owned and operated landfill. In conjunction with Okanogan County, a transfer station was constructed at the Bridgeport Bar Landfill.
The 1982 solid waste management plan was updated in 1989. The goal of the 1989 solid waste management plan was "to develop an economical and coordinated two-county solid waste management system that meets the needs of the present and future citizens of the area, while at the same time eliminating practices that may cause environmental degradation and foster unhealthy and hazardous situations."
The following objectives were identified, in order for the goal to be accomplished:
- develop an acceptable solid waste management system of storage, collection, transportation, processing, disposal and recycling;
- develop an organizational structure to coordinate all solid waste activities in the two-county area;
- develop a program to better inform the public on solid waste activities.
The 1989 solid waste management plan contained the following recommendations:
- participating jurisdictions should conduct comprehensive educational programs to make citizens aware of waste reduction and recycling opportunities and responsibilities;
- education programs should be developed for waste reduction as well as recycling;
- provide variable can rates to customers in participating jurisdictions;
- encourage volunteer and neighborhood groups to establish neighborhood drop-off centers for recycling;
- model waste reduction and recycling programs should be established for city, county and private offices;
- the county government, as well as city administrations, should adopt procurement policies that encourage purchasing products made from recycled materials;
- locally identify existing markets for recyclers operating in the region;
- the SWAC, as well as county and city legislative bodies, should support state legislation promoting waste reduction and recycling;
- to measure the success of recycling efforts in the planning area, the recycling waste stream must be measured;
- encourage households to compost at home;
- the participating jurisdictions should investigate the possibilities of providing publicly owned land for storage facility purposes;
- drop-off, buy-back and commercial collection programs should be encouraged and expanded to determine if set recycling goals can be reached;
- increased farmer education and promotion of refillable agricultural chemical containers to reduce agricultural wastes;
- residents within the two-county area should be assessed a surcharge on their solid waste rates to fund solid and hazardous waste planning and administrative expenses, as well as some implementation measures.
- the CDHD, in cooperation with other county and city departments, should investigate existing unpermitted demolition disposal sites and prompt the owners to apply for permits;
- the CDHD will be the lead agency for enforcement activities;
- increased enforcement efforts by the CDHD should be conducted for tire disposal;
Since the 1989 SWMP was prepared, many, but not all, of the recommendations have been implemented. In 1992 the Chelan-Douglas Health District developed a separate Solid Waste Program under the division of Environmental Health. In 1992 it was determined that transporting solid waste to the GWRLF was more economical than building a new transfer station at the Pine Canyon Landfill site.
5.2.2 1991 Chelan-Douglas Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan (MRWP)
In November, 1991 the Chelan-Douglas Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan (MRWP) was adopted to satisfy the responsibilities of Chelan and Douglas Counties and their cities and towns under the Hazardous Waste Management Act (HWMA). This joint-county MRWP met the requirements of Chapter 70.105 RCW. The adopted Chelan-Douglas MRWP outlined a strategy for properly managing household hazardous wastes, small quantity generator wastes, and agricultural wastes within the two-county area. The goals of the adopted Chelan-Douglas MRWP were:
- protect the natural resources and public health in Chelan and Douglas Counties by eliminating the discharge of moderate risk waste (MRW) into solid waste and wastewater treatment systems, and the environment through indiscriminate disposal;
- manage MRW in a manner that promotes, in order of priority;
a. waste reduction;
b. recycling;
c. physical, chemical, and biological treatment;
d. out-of-county hazardous waste incineration;
e. solidification and stabilization;
f. landfilling.
- increase public awareness of the importance of proper disposal and available alternatives for disposal of MRW;
- improve opportunities for citizens and businesses within Chelan and Douglas Counties to safely dispose of MRW;
- reduce the health threats presented to workers coming into contact with MRW disposed of in the solid waste stream or in wastewater treatment systems;
- coordinate improved systems for MRW management with existing and planned systems for waste reduction, recycling, and other programs for solid waste management within Chelan and Douglas Counties;
- encourage cooperation and coordination among all levels of government, citizens, and businesses in managing MRW;
- emphasize local responsibility for solving problems associated with MRW, rather than relying upon the federal or state government to provide solutions;
- comply with the requirements of RCW 70.105.220, which directs each local government to prepare a local hazardous waste management plan.
The 1991 Chelan-Douglas MRWP contained the following recommendations:
Recommended Education/Training Programs:
- implement a household hazardous waste (HHW) public information program;
- implement a MRW school education program;
- implement a small quantity generator (SQG) technical assistance program;
- implement an agricultural chemical waste assistance program;
- implement a MRW worker safety training program;
- implement a point-of-sale MRW information program.
Recommended Collection Programs:
- site a permanent fixed MRW collection facility;
- implement a HHW collection program;
- implement a SQG collection program;
- implement an agricultural chemical waste collection program;
At the request of Chelan County, the joint-county planning effort was terminated in July 1993. However, the Douglas County Solid Waste Program Office (DCSWPO) has continued to implement the recommendations identified within the adopted Chelan-Douglas MRWP. In September, 1999 the DCSWPO asked and received approval from the Department of Ecology (DOE) to combine an updated Douglas County MRWP into the DCCSWMP.
5.2.3 1994 Douglas County Used Oil Recycling Element
In March 1994 the Douglas County Used Oil Element (UOE) was adopted as an amendment to the Chelan-Douglas MRWP. The UOE met the requirements of Chapter 70.951 RCW and guides the management of household used oil within the RPA. The UOE addresses the existing management conditions, objectives and alternatives, and presents recommendations to enhance the management of used oil in the RPA. The goal of the adopted UOE was to protect the groundwater within the RPA by eliminating the discharge of used oil onto the ground or into the solid waste stream, and the environment through indiscriminate disposal.
The 1994 UOE contained the following recommendations:
- implement a point-of-sale notification program;
- bid out the servicing of participating jurisdictional vehicles and equipment;
- give preference to buying recycled oil whenever possible;
- encourage retailers who annually sell over 1,000 gallons of lubricating oil to establish take-back programs;
- establish waste oil collection centers at public facilities or maintenance shops in East Wenatchee, Rock Island, Mansfield and Waterville.
In September, 1999 the DCSWPO asked and received approval from the DOE to combine an updated UOE into the DCCSWMP.
5.2.4 1994 Douglas County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP)
In May, 1994 the Douglas County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) was adopted to satisfy the responsibilities of the participating jurisdictions under the Solid Waste Management Reduction and Recycling Act. The SWMP met the requirements of Chapter 70.95 RCW. The adopted SWMP outlined a strategy for properly managing solid wastes within the RPA. The goals of the adopted SWMP were:
- manage solid waste in a manner that promotes, in order of priority;
a. waste reduction (which includes reuse);
b. recycling, with source-separation of recyclables as the preferred method;
c. energy recovery, incineration or landfilling of separated wastes;
d. energy recovery, incineration or landfilling of mixed wastes.
- encourage public involvement and ensure the representation of the public in the planning process;
- increase public awareness of the importance of waste reduction and recycling;
- emphasize local responsibility for solving problems associated with solid waste, rather than relying on the federal or state government to provide solutions;
- established a recycling goal of 25%.
The 1994 SWMP contained the following recommendations:
Waste Reduction:
- continue and expand educational efforts to promote waste reduction;
- develop a backyard composting education program;
- provide more financial incentives for waste reduction;
- expand waste reduction programs in governmental offices;
- develop a waste reduction program for commercial businesses;
- monitor waste reduction programs.
Recycling:
- coordinate recycling education efforts with waste reduction programs;
- establish a curbside recycling program within the City of East Wenatchee;
- establish recycling collection centers within Mansfield, Rock Island and Waterville;
- encourage municipal permitting agencies to recommend that builders incorporate recycling collection areas into their building plans;
- implement a yard debris collection and processing program;
- continue and expand recycling programs in governmental offices;
- develop a monitoring and reporting program;
- continually investigate local, cost-effective markets;
- use state guidelines for procurement of recycled materials/products.
- continue and expand current recycling processing system.
- continue current collection practices;
- evaluate solid waste collection rates and modify them as needed to create additional incentives for reducing waste and recycling;
- give Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) authority over the collection of source-separated recyclables within the unincorporated area of the RPA.
- establish quality control standards at the GWRLF;
- conduct a feasibility study regarding the development of a regional transfer station within the RPA;
- encourage the GWRLF to limit waste importation.
- continue current disposal practices;
- proceed with formal closure of Bridgeport Bar and Pine Canyon Landfills;
- evaluate out-of-county landfill alternatives as part of a regional transfer station feasibility study.
- update and enhance the 1984 Douglas County Biosolids Management Plan;
- continue beneficial use of biosolids to agricultural lands;
- encourage the use of agricultural and other land application of biosolids;
- use remaining biosolids as landfill cover material as applicable.
- include septage in an updated and enhanced Douglas County Biosolids Management Plan;
- continue existing practices as appropriate.
- require that a letter of intent for the disposal location and amount of CDL waste be submitted with permit application;
- require operators of existing unpermitted CDL waste sites to apply for permits;
- if sufficient expansion of capacity is not gained by the methods noted above, pursue siting one or more CDL landfills.
- continue existing practices while exploring opportunities to recycle and/or compost.
- continue existing practices while exploring opportunities to recycle and/or compost.
- continue existing practices.
- examine the possibility of coordinating with one of the large companies in the RPA that is sending used tires to be recycled;
- provide information to the public and businesses of the preferred tire disposal options once developed.
- ensure biomedical wastes are properly handled/disposed of;
- develop a biomedical waste management plan and monitoring program if necessary;
- encourage cooperative ventures for proper handling and disposal of biomedical waste.
- support private efforts to increase on-site remediation which will not threaten public health;
- for PCS that is not practical to remediate on-site, encourage use as landfill cover as applicable.
- continue asbestos disposal using approved and permitted methods.
Whitegoods (appliances)
- participating jurisdictions should encourage the GWRLF to continue existing practice of accepting purged whitegoods for recycling;
- sponsor a special collection program during which the cost to the public is significantly reduced.
- evaluate and, if appropriate, modify groundwater monitoring responsibilities at the Bridgeport Bar and Pine Canyon Landfills;
- develop new "model" ordinances, as needed, to enhance the solid waste management system;
- improve interagency coordination and oversight;
- increase CDHD staffing and training as necessary.
- determine whether new programs will be managed publicly or privately on a case-by-case basis;
- continue to apply for grant money for the funding of solid waste programs;
- develop additional revenue to help fund solid waste programs, if necessary;
- if the above measures do not produce sufficient funding for solid waste programs, the implementation of a solid waste disposal district should be carefully examined by the Douglas County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC);
- enhance staffing for solid waste programs as necessary.
Since the 1994 SWMP was adopted, many, but not all, of the recommendations have been implemented. The current SWMP was required to be updated by December 1999. However, the DOE did not publish its Guidelines for the Development of Local Solid Waste Management Plans and Plan Revisions until December 1999. Therefore, the DCSWPO did not formally begin the updating process until January 2000. The DCCSWMP is scheduled to be adopted by the participating jurisdictions in June 2002 and final approval by the DOE is anticipated by July 2002. Therefore, this DCCSWMP is for the planning period of July 1st, 2002 through June 30th, 2023. The updating of this DCCSWMP is scheduled to begin in May 2005.