CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
State Solid Waste Management
Legislation in Southern States
October 1993
Funded by EPA Region IV
Alabama - Arkantaa - Florida - Georgia - Kentucky - North CaroOna - South C^oOna • Tanne«i«« • Texaa • WjjWa - We* Virginia
-------
Project Overview
The Conference of Southern County Associations was established in 1990 by a coalition of
statewide county government associations located in the Southeastern United States. CSCA
serves as a network to assist its members in sharing information on issues of common
interest While CSCA has incorporated, primarily for the purpose of receipt of grant funds
from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, it has no staff or budget. Member
associations made a commitment during the initial program set up to keep the network
simple and informal. CSCA meetings are held at convenient intervals throughout the year
and member states rotate as meeting hosts. Special CSCA sessions, if warranted, are also
conducted during the NACo annual conference and legislative conference. Topics for
meetings conducted to date have included revenue/finance, public safety, health/human
services, ethics, insurance pools and organizational overviews of the member state
associations.
During the initial session of the member states, a roundtable discussion was conducted to
identify the top crisis confronting the various associations. Each of the seven states in
attendance indicated without hesitation that the issue of solid waste management was by far
the most difficult issue facing counties within the region. Given this factor, several staff
members approached EPA Region IV to discuss the possibility of establishing a public
private partnership project As initially envisioned, the project would combine the financial
and technical assistance resources of EPA with the membership base and established
communication network of county government associations.
After eighteen months of struggling to lay a foundation for this unique concept, a successful
formula was defined. As the project now functions, EPA Region IV provides a full-time
senior staff person utilizing the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) program. This
program provides full salary, fringe benefits and some incidental costs for a two year period.
There is an option to file for a two year extension if warranted. In addition to the staff
position, the EPA has provided funds for office operation. The project coordinator is a
specialist in EPA grant writing. He concentrates his attention on federal project filing
requirements, the preparation of a project newsletter and coordination of work conducted
by project contractors.
To date, contract work has been conducted by the national consulting engineering firm of
Roy F. Weston, Inc. in cooperation with Dr. Jim Kundell a senior advisor of the Carl Vinson
Institute of Government at the University of Georgia. The various products of this CSCA
venture are included in this document.
For more information on the CSCA environmental initiative please contact CSCA Chairman
Mr. Jerry Griffin (Executive Director of the Association County Commissioners of Georgia)
at (404) 522-5022 or the project staff contact Mr. John Gardner at (404) 487-5477.
B:\C02\CSCA\POOLR001 JPA
-------
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (WESTON®) is a national consulting engineering firm that has served
government and industry in the environmental fields for 40 years. WESTON's primary areas
of experience are Solid and Hazardous Wastes, Air Quality, Water and Wastewater
Management, Groundwater Hydrogeology, and Energy. WESTON's staff of more than
3,000 employees comprise a multi-disciplinary scientific and civil, chemical, environmental,
mechanical, electrical, and sanitary engineers; planners; chemists; biologists; geologists;
economists; ecologists; and other skilled professionals.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. has been providing diversified environmental engineering and consulting
services to clients for more than 35 years. WESTON has served more than 4,500 clients
including local, state, and Federal governments, and industrial, institutional, and commercial
clients. As an innovative leader in the environmental field, WESTON has successfully
completed projects throughout the world.
WESTON's mission is to assist clients with enhancing the quality of human life and the
physical environment through the creative and sound application of human, economic, and
natural resource principles; advanced science; and applied technology. WESTON's objective
is to provide comprehensive and integrated professional services efficiently and effectively.
The key to our success is the ability to work with clients to define, address and resolve their
environmental concerns. WESTON offers the technical talent, specialized expertise, and
requisite facilities that are so important in responding to environmental issues.
WESTON's comprehensive service areas include:
• Solid Waste Management
• Wastewater Management
• Water Supply and Resources
• Air Quality Management
• Groundwater Management
• Asbestos Management
• Hazardous Waste Management
CERCLA Programs and Site
RCRA Programs and Site
• Information Management Systems
• Laboratory Services
• Life Sciences
B:\COZ\CSCA\POOLR001 JPA 2
-------
• Management Consulting
• Occupational Health and Safety
• Pollution Prevention
• Process Safety and Emergency Management
• Radiological Waste Management Planning
• Remediation and Construction
• Thermal Treatment Systems
James E. Kundell, Ph.D.
Dr. James Kundell, is a Senior Technical Advisor to WESTON. Dr. Kundell has served as
an environmental advisor to states and local governments for more than a decade. He has
an in-depth understanding of a wide range of policy and technical issues related to solid
waste management, wetlands, stormwater, water and wastewater management, and air
quality.
Dr. Kundell is a Senior Associate at the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the
University of Georgia. Dr. Kundell, who holds a Ph.D.Jn environmental science from
Syracuse University, is the author of nearly 100 books, articles and public policy reports on
solid and hazardous waste management and other environmental and natural resource topics
including water resources, wetlands, air quality, and growth management. Dr. Kundell has
been instrumental in developing state solid waste management legislation and solid waste
management plans in seven states and has provided information and advice to several
others. He was a key architect in developing Georgia's Comprehensive Solid Waste
Management Act and several other pieces of environmental legislation. He was hired by
the Governor of Kentucky to draft that state's comprehensive solid waste management act
which was enacted in 1991 and is a major contributor to the state solid waste management
plans of both Georgia and North Carolina. In 1986-1987, Dr. Kundell chaired the National
Conference of State Legislatures Solid Waste Management Committee. He currently is
chairman of the Georgia Recycling Market Development Council, vice chairman of the
Southern Legislative Conference's recycling committee (e.g. RENEWS), and serves on the
editorial advisory board of Solid Waste and Power.
B:\C02\CSCA\POOLR001JPA
-------
Table of Contents
Historic Perspective 1
Legislative Analysis 3
Solid Waste Disposal Facility Standards 4
Implementing Agencies 4
Recycling and Waste Reduction Goals 5
Planning Requirements 8
Regionalization 8
Financial Assistance to Local Governments 10
State Responsibilities for Recycling and Waste Reduction 13
Other Provisions 13
Concluding Thoughts 13
m
Appendix 16
Alabama
Georgia
Kentucky
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
-------
List of Tables
Table 1: Date of Enactment of Comprehensive Solid Waste Legislation 3
Table 2: Implmentation Agencies 6
Table 3: State Recycling and Waste Reduction Goals 7
Table 4: Planning Requirements 9
Table 5: Regionalization 10
Table 6: Financial Assistance 11
Table 7: State Recycling and Waste Reduction Responsibilities .... 12
-------
Since the publication of this document, four additional states have joined the Regional Solid
Waste/Environmental network. These states are:
Arkansas
Florida
Mississippi
West Virginia
Legislative synopsis summarizing state solid waste legislation have been prepared for each
of these states and have been included in Section 2. The legislative analysis presented in
Section 1 addresses only the original eight participating states. This will be updated by
December 1993.
6 \C02\CSCA\POOLR001 JPA
-------
-------
State Solid Waste Management Legislation in Southern States
James E. Kundell, Deanna L. Ruffer and Steffney Thompson
Municipal solid waste management in the United States is in a transition period. Based
on the need to assure that solid waste disposal facilities do not result in environmental
degradation, stricter standards have been adopted, resulting in higher management costs.
These costs coupled with the difficulty in siting management facilities have led to
considerable state legislative action to put in place environmentally protective and cost
effective mechanisms to manage municipal solid waste.
This paper examines the status of state solid waste management legislation in the
southern states participating in the Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network project
sponsored by the Conference of Southern County Associations (CSCA). States included in
this project are: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, and Virginia. The intent is to identify the common solid waste management issues
facing counties throughout the region and to provide CSCA, the participating state
associations, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) information on the status
of state solid waste management programs in the South.
Historic Perspective
Disposing of municipal solid waste has historically been left to local governments and
the private sector. It was not until 1965 that federal legislation was passed in the form of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act The thrust of this legislation was to move the country from using
open dumps to sanitary landfills for solid waste disposal. Sanitary landfills differed from
open dumps principally in having the waste compacted and covered daily. Although the
federal law provided direction and guidance, no federal permitting system was called for. In
the late 1960s and early 1970s, however, the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia enacted legislation which established
permitting systems for solid waste disposal. In South Carolina the state assumed the
regulatory authority based on its general environmental protection powers.
In 1970, the federal Resource Recovery Act amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act to
provide support for reducing the waste stream. This, plus the mood of the country at the
time, led to efforts to increase recycling across the country. These recycling efforts were
difficult to sustain, however, for two reasons. First, as local governments moved from open
dumps to sanitary landfills, they found that it was still cheaper to landfill than it was to
recycle. Second, the recycling efforts that were adopted tended to be add-ons to the solid
waste programs. They were voluntary efforts that were never really institutionalized and
integrated into the waste management program. Consequently, many of these efforts were
discontinued.
In 1976, the federal law was amended and greatly expanded with the passage of the
I-1
-------
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The thrust of this law was to remove
most of the hazardous waste from the solid waste stream and to establish different
management requirements for hazardous waste. Subtitle C of RCRA established management
requirements for hazardous waste while Subtitle D focused on solid waste management As
with the 1965 law, the role of the federal government was widely interpreted to be advisory,
leaving the states to deal with nonhazardous solid waste disposal under their "exclusive
regulatory powers."
By 1984, however, it was apparent that more was needed to ensure that solid waste
disposal did not result in environmental degradation and that consistent minimum standards
were applied nationally. With the 1984 amendments to RCRA, Congress directed EPA to
develop environmentally protective landfill standards. Although final Subtitle D regulations
were not released until October 1991, draft regulations were released in 1988. The draft
regulations reflected the direction EPA was leaning to prevent landfills from contaminating
water resources and degrading environmental quality in other ways and included such
requirements as composite liners, leachate collection systems, methane monitoring, ground
water monitoring, and closure and post-closure care plans.
The message sent by the draft regulations was that the cost of solid waste disposal
would increase dramatically. This realization coupled with the difficulty in siting new
disposal facilities placed local governments in an onerous situation. As a result they turned to
their respective state capitals for help. As shown in Table 1, between 1988 and 1991 all
states participating in this project, as well as most states across the country, enacted
comprehensive solid waste management legislation. Florida and Virginia were the first states
in the South to enact comprehensive legislation, doing so in 1988. Other states followed:
Alabama, North Carolina and Texas in 1989; Georgia in 1990; Kentucky, South Carolina, and
Tennessee in 1991. The laws enacted by states were essentially designed to accomplish two
objectives. First, the laws brought the states into general compliance with what was
anticipated to be the final Subtitle D regulations, usually by providing the regulatory agency
or its board the authority to promulgate rules consistent with the federal requirements.
Kentucky took the most forceful action by adopting stringent landfill standards and an
aggressive time table for meeting these standards. The second objective of the state
comprehensive laws was to set into place a variety of criteria designed to reduce the amount
of waste requiring disposal.
By adding waste reduction requirements to the traditional' disposal efforts, the
management of solid waste became much more complex. To reduce the waste stream, two
task must be accomplished. First, the behavior of essentially all the people must be changed.
They must be willing to separate out materials for recycling; willing to participate in back
yard or community composting efforts; willing to think about how they can do things
differently to reduce the amount of waste they generate in the first place; and willing to
purchase products made from recovered materials. This requires a major and sustained
educational program. Second, for waste reduction to work, the infrastructure must be in place
to convert recovered materials to new products of equivalent quality and cost as those made
I-2
-------
from virgin materials. Markets must be available for the material recovered from the waste
stream. Additionally, however, the total infrastructure must be in place to collect, process,
and transport recovered materials to the markets and for them to be used to make products
that consumers will purchase. Without both effective educational programs and the necessary
infrastructure being in place, waste reduction efforts will fail.
Table 1
Date of Enactment of Comprehensive Solid Waste Legislation
State
Virginia
Alabama
Texas
North Carolina
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Date Enacted
1988
1989
1989
1989
1990
1991
1991
1991
Dates Amended
1991, 1992
1992
1991
1991
1991, 1992
1992
Due to the complexity of current solid waste management efforts, both state and local
planning is necessary. Planning is the way governments think about how they can accomplish
a complex task. It presents the strategy adopted for accomplishing that task and serves as an
agreement among all parties involved in developing the plan on the policies and programs
necessary to reach the objectives.
State legislation provides the framework for states and their subdivisions to
comprehensively reduce and manage their solid waste. That legislation can facilitate sound
solid waste reduction and management efforts or it can place impediments and costly
constraints on the effective management efforts. For that reason it is important to consider
the legislation in place in each of the participating states.
Legislative Analysis
Each participating state has adopted comprehensive solid waste management legislation
and most states have amended that legislation at least once. It should be emphasized that the
solid waste management legislation adopted by states differs from most environmental
legislation in that there has been little in the way of federal requirements relating to solid
waste. Essentially, Subtitle D of RCRA sets forth requirements for locating, designing,
-------
constructing, operating and closing landfills and providing post closure care for the site.
Also, under RCRA and the Clean Air Act, requirements are in place for municipal solid waste
incinerators. However, although RCRA articulates the importance of reducing the waste
stream, there are no federal requirements to do so. As a result, the comprehensive laws
adopted by the participating states vary considerably since they are designed to meet the
needs of each state rather than federal requirements. Additionally, over the five year period
since the first legislation was enacted in the region, insights and understanding of the
effectiveness of different approaches has been gleaned. Thus, the legislation passed in 1991
varies considerably from that enacted in 1988 and the amendments subsequently enacted have
altered some of the earlier policies.
Following is a discussion of the major components of the comprehensive solid waste
laws enacted by the participating states. Tables included with the discussion list states by
year of the enactment of their major comprehensive legislation in order to discern trends. A
synopsis of the legislation adopted by each participating state can be found in the Appendix.
Solid Waste Disposal Facility Standards
With the 1984 amendments, RCR!A requires that federal standards be established for
solid waste disposal facilities. Consequently, all local governments in participating states are
facing essentially the same set of standards. It is interesting to note that, although the Subtitle
D regulations are a major driving force behind the comprehensive legislation adopted by
states, meeting the requirements requires relatively little in the way of legislative language.
By providing the state environmental protection agency orjhe board that oversees it with the
authority to adopt rules and regulations at least as stringent as the federal requirements, the
legislative requirements have been met. Legislatively, all participating states have assigned
the responsibility to ensure that solid waste is managed in an environmentally protective
manner to their environmental protection bureaucracy. State environmental agencies are
currently developing their plans to enable EPA to delegate Subtitle D responsibilities to them.
EPA will review the plans to ensure that the state agencies have the legal authority to carry
out the responsibilities under Subtitle D and that the states have the resources to effectively
implement the program. Those states that meet these conditions will receive Subtitle D
authority from EPA. It is assumed that all participating states will be delegated Subtitle D
implementation authority.
Implementing Agencies
Historically, all state responsibilities for solid waste management have been assigned to
the state environmental protection agency. As waste reduction responsibilities were added
and the complexity of waste management increased, additional state agencies were brought
into the picture. First, some states, including North Carolina and South Carolina, created
offices of waste reduction in their environmental protection agency to separate the technical
assistance activities of waste reduction from the regulatory responsibilities of the agency.
States have also found that their purchasing agency has a role in procuring products made
-------
from recovered materials; that an infrastructure authority might play a role in providing grants
and loans for facility construction; that their building authority may handle recycling activities
for state agencies; and that their education department has a role in solid waste education. In
addition, Tennessee and Georgia have assigned the planning responsibilities to the state
planning agency. Although new responsibilities have been assigned to existing agencies, is
some cases new units were created to carry out activities. Several of the participating states
created market development councils or other bodies to help evaluate and develop markets for
recovered materials for the state. South Carolina also created a standing solid waste advisory
council. Due to the complexity and the on going need to tweak the legislation to make in
work better, having a standing advisory council to oversee the changes in the law and its
implementation could prove helpful, especially since multiple agencies are involved in
implementing the laws. Table 2 shows the agencies involved in solid waste management
efforts in each of the participating states.
Recycling and Waste Reduction Goals
One of the major components of the comprehensive legislation enacted by the
participating states is the goal(s) set for recycling or reducing the waste stream. Recycling
goals set a percentage of the waste stream to be recycled by a certain date. Waste reduction
goals establish a goal to reduce the waste stream requiring disposal by a certain percentage by
a certain date. There are two major differences between the two goals. First, waste reduction
goals take into consideration source reduction, reuse of materials, and composting that are not
generally counted in recycling goals. Second, measurement of waste reduction is
accomplished by weighing the waste entering the disposal facility and tracking those weight
over time. Measurement of recycling rates requires local governments to account for all
materials recovered and recycled from within their jurisdiction, not just the local
government's program.
As shown in Table 3, the first states to adopt comprehensive legislation in the South
tended to adopt recycling goals while those enacting legislation in 1990 or later tended to
adopt waste reduction goals. North Carolina originally adopted a recycling goal but identified
the implementation problems associated with measurement and in 1991, amended its
legislation to change to a waste reduction goal. South Carolina included both a recycling goal
and a waste reduction goal in its legislation.
7-5
-------
Table 2
Implementing Agencies
State (Date)
Environmental Agency
Other Agencies
Virginia (88)
Department of Waste
Management
Department of Economic
Development; Virginia
Resources Authority;
Department of Education
Alabama (89)
Department of
Environmental Management
Texas (89)
Natural Resource
Conservation Commission
North Carolina (89)
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural
Resources
Department of
Administration; Department
of Commerce; Department
of Public Instruction; Solid
Waste Management Capital
Projects Financing Agency
Georgia (90)
Environmental Protection
Division of the Department
of Natural Resources
Department of Community
Affairs; Department of
Administrative Services;
Building Authority;
Environmental Facilities
Authority; Recycling
Market Development
Council
Kentucky (91)
Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection
Cabinet
Infrastructure Authority;
Recycling Brokerage
Authority
South Carolina (91)
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
Division of General
Services; Recycling Market
Development Council; Solid
Waste Advisory Council
Tennessee (91)
Department of Environment
and Conservation
State Planning Office;
Office of Cooperative
Marketing for Recyclables;
Recycling Market Advisory
Council
-------
Table 3
State Recycling and Waste Reduction Goals
State (Date)
Virginia (88)
Alabama (89)
Texas (89)
North Carolina (89)
Georgia (90)
Kentucky (91)
South Carolina (91)
Tennessee (91)
Recycling Goal
Local plans must have
provisions for recycling 10%
by 1991; 15% by 1993; and
25% by 1995
25% but no date identified
40% by weight by 1994
(15% composting goal by
1994)
25% goal was deleted in
1991 in favor of a waste
reduction goal
25% by weight by 1997; no
more than 40% of which
may be yard waste or C&D
waste
Waste Reduction Goal
25% but no date identified
25% by 1993, 40% by 2001
over FY 1991 levels (per
capita basis)
25% by 1996 over 1992
levels (statewide, per capita
basis)
25% by 1997 over 1993
levels (statewide, per capita
basis)
30% by 1997 over 1993
levels (statewide, per capita
basis)
25% by 1995 over 1989
levels (statewide, per capita
basis)
— 7
-------
Planning Requirements
As previously discussed, as the complexity of solid waste management increased, the
need for local governments to plan also increased. So too, although state solid waste
management plans have been required in the past by EPA, the new round of comprehensive
laws have required state solid waste management plans to more specifically address the needs
of the state. There are three general reasons why states have undertaken solid waste reduction
and management planning: (1) to conduct a needs assessment to identify infrastructure and
capacity needs; (2) to provide guidance and directives to local governments on solid waste
planning and management; and (3) to articulate state policies and the specific actions
necessary to implement those policies.
Plans previously required by EPA were primarily in the form of needs assessments
designed to ensure that adequate capacity would be available to meet the disposal
requirements of the state and its subdivisions. Many of the state plans required by the
comprehensive solid waste management laws also tend to be of this nature (i.e. Alabama,
Kentucky, Tennessee). Some states, however, have used the planning process tb provide local
governments with directives and guidance (i.e. Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina).
Georgia and North Carolina also utilized the state solid waste management plans as policy
documents that articulate a number of policies and identify the specific actions necessary to
implement those policies. Actually, all plans developed by the participating states address the
three purposes for state solid waste management planning but the emphasis varies
considerably from state to state. North Carolina has the most comprehensive state solid waste
management plan in the region. That plan is divided into three volumes: (1) a technical
assessment; (2) a guidance document for local governments; and (3) a state strategy
document Table 4 presents the status of solid waste management planning in the
participating states.
Regionalization
Although states have set goals to reduce the amount of waste generated, a facility must
receive a sufficient amount of waste to make it economically feasible to operate (e.g. the rule
of thumb is over 200-250 tons per day). Consequently, to obtain the desired quantity of
waste necessary to keep the tipping fees at an acceptable level, waste from a larger
geographic region must be funneled to each landfill requiring regional approaches to be
developed for managing solid waste.
8
-------
Table 4
Planning Requirements
State (Date)
Virginia (88)
Alabama (89)
Texas (89)
North Carolina (89)
Georgia (90)
Kentucky (91)
South Carolina (91)
Tennessee (91)
State Plan
Required
Required (2 phases)
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Local/Regional Plan
Required
Required; regional needs
assessment
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required; regional needs
assessment
As presented in Table 5, all states have recognized the need for regionalization. Texas
has the strongest language directing the Governor to designate solid waste management
regions. Virginia provides the Governor with the authority to do so but it is permissive. All
other participating states encourage local governments to form regional solid waste
management entities but do not require that they do. Alabama and Tennessee both require
that regional waste assessments be conducted. In addition to encouraging regionalization,
some states (i.e. Georgia, Virginia) can show preference in awarding grants and loans to
regional approaches over single county efforts. The effectiveness of these incentives,
however, is directly related to the level of financial support provided.
-------
Table 5
Regionalization
State (Date)
Virginia (88)
Alabama (89)
Texas (89)
North Carolina (89)
Georgia (90)
Kentucky (91)
South Carolina (91)
Tennessee (91)
Regional Provisions
Governor may designate regions; preference for
loans and grants given to regions
Regional planning and development commissions
develop regional needs assessments; counties may
join together.
Governor designates regions; regions can be
divided into subregions; regional solid waste plans
Encouragp regionalization; regional authorities
may be formed
Encourage regionalization; regional authorities
may be formed
Encourage regionalization; waste management
districts may be formed
Encourage regionalization
Regional solid waste assessment; encourage
regionalization; host county can impose a
surcharge on waste received from other counties
Financial Assistance to Local Governments
The financial assistance provided by the states to local governments is important in
ensuring that cooperation will occur and that requirements are met. Since many local
governments are financially stressed and faced with a barrage of "unfunded mandates," the
financial assistance tied to solid waste management efforts becomes increasingly important
Presented in Table 6 are the legislative provisions dealing with grants and loans. Although
these provisions appear significant, if they are not funded by the states, they accomplish little.
Unfortunately, this is the case is some states.
- 10
-------
Grant and loan provisions of note include: Tennessee's grants for convenience centers,
Georgia's grants for solid waste enforcement programs, and South Carolina's use of bonus
grants as "carrots" to encourage local governments to reach the state recycling and waste
reduction goals.
Table 6
Financial Assistance
State (Date)
Virginia (88)
Alabama (89)
Texas (89)
North Carolina (89)
Georgia (90)
Kentucky (91)
South Carolina (91)
Tennessee (91)
Financial Assurance Provisions
Grants for collecting, transporting, disposing and
managing solid waste; Grants for solid waste and
recycling facilities; loans for solid waste and recycling
facilities
No provisions
Grants for planning, facilities, and program
administration
Loans for construction of facilities; grants for collection,
reuse and proper disposal of used oil
Grants and loans for construction of solid waste handling
facilities; grants for enforcement programs, innovative
technologies for recycling and reuse and efforts to
promote recycling and waste reduction
50% planning grants; grants and loans for capital cost of
facility construction
Grants to carry out responsibilities; After 1997, bonus
grants for those local governments that meet the
recycling and waste reduction goals
Grants for planning, equipment for recycling sites, and
construction; matching grants for establishing
convenience centers; competitive grants for collection of
household hazardous waste
/- 11
-------
Table 7
State Recycling and Waste Reduction Responsibilities
State (Date)
Virginia (88)
Alabama (89)
I Texas (89)
North Carolina (89)
Georgia (90)
1 Kentucky (91)
South Carolina (91)
Tennessee (91)
Agency Recycling
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
State Procurement
No provisions
No provisions
Procurement
preferences
No provisions
Procurement
preferences
No provisions
Procurement
preferences
Procurement
preferences
Market
Development
Required of
Department of
Economic
Development;
Recycling Market
Development
Council
No provisions
Required of Natural
Resources
Conservation
Commission
Required of
Department of
Commerce
Recycling Market
Development
Council
Recycling
Brokerage Authority
Recycling Market
Development
Council
Recycling Market
Advisory Council;
Office of
Cooperative
Marketing for
Recyclables
-------
State Responsibilities for Recycling and Waste Reduction
In addition to planning and guidance activities, the state has three identifiable roles to
play in the recycling and waste reduction area: (1) requiring agencies to separate out materials
for recycling; (2) procurement of products made from recovered materials to stimulate the
markets; and (3) market analysis and development All participating states require that state
agencies separate out materials for recycling. This is a comparatively easy effort and one that
has high visibility. States have been less prone to require procurement of products made
from recovered materials. If a trend is apparent from Table 7 regarding procurement, it is
that states may be moving in the direction of adopting procurement requirements. Another
trend evident in Table 7 is that states have moved from assigning market analysis and
development responsibilities to the state economic development agency to creating a separate
body composed, at least in part, of industry representatives to analyze the market situation
and to develop recommendations for market expansion. Virginia amended its law in 1993 to
create a recycling market development council. Kentucky and Tennessee have also created
units to assist local governments in marketing recyclables.
Other Provisions
The comprehensive solid waste legislation adopted by the participating states includes a
number of other provisions such as those to require public education and participation and full
cost accounting and notification. All participating states except Alabama and Texas require
certification of operators of solid waste facilities. Only three states (i.e. Texas, Georgia and
South Carolina) include conflict resolution provisions in their laws. While the first states to
enact their comprehensive legislation (Le. Alabama, Virginia) made no provisions to require
full cost accounting and disclosure to residents of the cost of solid/waste management, all
states enacting their legislation after 1989 included such provisions.
Concluding Thoughts
Of the participating states, Virginia enacted its legislation first While some other
states that enacted legislation at the same time have been confronted with implementation
problems, Virginia avoided many problems by providing its Department of Waste
Management with general, permissive legislation. Where implementation problems have been
most evident is in requiring local governments to undertake specific actions that are of little
consequence in the grand waste reduction and management scheme but require scarce
resources to carry out (e.g. banning disposal of certain types of materials that have limited
impacts, requiring accounting of certain types of materials because only a certain percentage
counts toward recycling goal attainment).
Most state legislation identifies financial assistance measures the state can use to
provide assistance to local governments. These appear to be a key factor in determining the
rate at which states are able to implement their laws. Those states that are able to provide
/-13
-------
financial assistance to local governments in the form of grants and loans appear to be making
more rapid progress in addressing solid waste management concerns. However, where
funding is dependent on general revenues, financing options identified in state laws have been
difficult to fund. A trend apparent in participating states is the move toward user fees to
finance programs. This is a necessary move if adequate financing is to be available. It is
difficult for legislators to provide solid waste programs with sufficient funding when financial
resources are limited and competition with other worthwhile programs is intense.
Moving toward user fees to finance programs is also apparent at the local level. This
move has been spurred both by legislative requirements and a need for generating additional
funds to manage the solid waste program without raising taxes. State laws have encouraged
the use of tipping fees by local governments, required certain fees be assessed at the disposal
point, and encouraged or required accounting for die full cost of the solid waste program.
Solid waste management is an organic effort that must be continually evaluated. As
conditions change, new decisions have to be made. Due to the interrelatedness of solid waste
management it is necessary to periodically think through the entire process to make sure that
all components are working the way they should. In order to accomplish this, solid waste
management plans have been required of states and their local governments or combinations
of local governments. These solid waste management plans should be periodically updated to
ensure their effectiveness.
As a whole, the participating states have adopted sound frameworks for reducing and
managing their solid waste. Since solid waste management is complex and interrelated, it is
important to periodically adjust the laws to ensure effective waste reduction and management
Technical corrections to state legislation on provisions that are networking as intended may
resolve conflicts and result in more effective management If these provisions are allowed to
fester too long without being addressed, it becomes politically more difficult to reach
consensus.
It must be stressed, however, that solid waste management efforts are becoming
increasingly complex. Early state legislation focused on requiring landfills and, subsequently,
recycling. As more states grappled widi the issues and evaluated efforts of other states, more
complex, comprehensive approaches were adopted. The result is the development of a body
of solid waste law, as well as environmental law, that support and dictate sound solid waste
management When such a body of law exists, amending the statutes becomes more complex.
Laws that were well conceived can be eviscerated by amendments designed to address
specific issues but result in major changes. Developing legislative solutions requires more
legal research and better understanding of the overall legislative requirements.
When state legislatures were first considering comprehensive solid waste management
legislation, they were confronted with a conundrum. Legislators were responding to the
demands of their constituents to resolve the solid waste management issues now. People
wanted action and they were not inclined to wait for results. At the same time, however, to
/- 14
-------
implement complex legislation requiring changes in human behavior and the development of
expensive institutional and corporate infrastructure requires time. Legislators were thus faced
with building into their laws realistic time frames for implementation but being politically
responsive to their constituents for resolving the issues as fast as possible. As a result, most
states built in implementation time frames of from five to seven years.
While states were developing their comprehensive laws, EPA was finalizing the
Subtitle D regulations. Li October 1991, after all the participating states had enacted their
solid waste laws, the final Subtitle D regulations were released. These regulations set a two
year period for states and their subdivisions to be in compliance. This short time frame has
had a major impact on state and local government solid waste management efforts by shifting
priorities and resources to meet the Subtitle D requirements. Local planning requirements,
recycling and waste reduction efforts, and other actions required under state law have been
delayed in some states due to the focus on meeting the disposal requirements under Subtitle
D. As a result, it is likely that state and local governments will have to reevaluate where they
are in 1994 after the disposal decisions have been made.
This is especially true if Congress amends the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act in 1993. A wide variety of issues are being considered but it is too early to determine
what form the RCRA amendments might take. It is safe to assume that whatever steps are
taken by Congress, they will likely have a major impact on how state and local governments
manage solid waste.
One trend that is apparent and exemplified by CSCA's sponsorship of this project, is
that increasingly solid waste management is taking on a raultistate regional flavor. Other
regions of the country have already moved in this direction as exemplified by such bodies as
Coalition of Northeastern Governors (CONEG) and the Northeast Recycling Coalition
(NERC). In addition to CSCA's efforts, the Southern Legislative Conference, composed of
17 southern states, has created it's RENEWS program to evaluate recycling markets and
related issues and the Southern States Energy Board, comprising the same states, has
undertaken a public/private effort to analyze common solid waste and recycling issues in the
region. It is likely that these multistate regional efforts will continue and assume a greater
role in addressing some types of solid waste management issues.
It is federal and state legislation that determines what local governments must do to
reduce and manage solid waste. As such, this legislation can support sound efforts or it can
impede effective management It is essential that local officials work closely with their
congressional delegation and their state legislators to ensure that federal and state legislative
measures support their efforts to ensure that solid waste generation rates are reduced and that
those wastes that must be discarded arc disposed of in an environmentally protective manner.
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Alabama
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Solid Waste Management Plan Act. 1989.
Amended 1992. §22-27-40 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency: Department of Environ-
mental Management.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
Phase I of State Plan shall include regula-
tions to implement a statewide goal of a
25% waste reduction and recycling pro-
gram. §22-27-45(4)(a)(3).
Planning Requirements
State plan is required and will be devel-
oped in two phases. Phase I is due Novem-
ber 16, 1990. Phase II will develop a final
master plan for the state and incorporate
the local plans. §22-27-45(4).
Each regional planning and development
commission must prepare a regional needs
assessment by November 16, 1989. §22-
27-46.
Each county and municipality that does not
prepare a plan with a county, must prepare
a solid waste management plan by Novem-
ber 16, 1990.
Regionalization Provisions
Counties may join with other counties to
develop joint solid waste management
plans. Each regional planning and devel-
opment commission must prepare a region-
al needs assessment report for that region.
This assessment shall be revised annually.
The report is to include recommendations
to local governments on the feasibility of
joint efforts with the region to develop
solid waste management or disposal facili-
ty. §22-27-47(a) and (c).
Flow Control Provisions
Row control restrictions are to be consid-
ered in the planning process. The regional
assessments must evaluate environmental
and economic implications of acceptance
of solid waste from outside the region.
The second phase of the state plan must
evaluate the option of developing waste
flow controls within the state. See §22-27-
46(a)(4) and §22-27-45(b)(6).
In addition, counties and cities may agree
with other counties or cities when it is
economical and feasible, to jointly or indi-
vidually collect, haul, and/or dispose of
solid waste generated in the cooperating
area. §22-27-5. Waste generated out-of
state, however, is subject to a mandatory
requirement Before out-of-state waste can
be disposed of in-state, the transporter
-------
must post proof of financial assurance.
§22-27-5(d).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
No provisions.
Fees
A county or municipality may establish
fees, charges, and rates and may collect
and disburse funds within cooperating
areas or districts, inside or outside the local
government's boundaries, for the specific
purpose of administering this article and
providing and operating a solid waste
program. §22-27-5.
Counties may sell interest-bearing warrants
to finance solid waste collection and dis-
posal facilities. §22-27-20 et seq. Counties
are also authorized to form authorities
which have the power to issue bonds and
notes to support acquiring and constructing
solid waste disposal or resource recovery
facilities. §11-89A-1 et seq.
Financial Assurance
No provisions.
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle. §22-228-3.
Public involvement in local planning
process. §22-27-47(f). 22-27-48(a).
Legislation provides:
County or city may make mandatory
public participation in solid waste dis-
posal system. §22-27-3(a).
Legislation does not require:
Local or state procurement require-
ments.
Market analysis and development for
recyclables.
Public education programs.
Conflict resolution procedures.
Full cost accounting and notification re-
quirements.
Operator certification.
Unique Features
In the absence of specific state legislation,
the state solid waste management plan
must mirror the requirements under RCRA.
Alabama and Tennessee are the only par-
ticipating states that require a regional
needs assessment.
The state plan is to be conducted in 2
phases, incorporating the local plans into a
master plan.
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Arkansas
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Arkansas Solid Waste Management Act
1971. Amended 1991. §8-6-200 et seq.
Solid Waste Management and Recycling
Fund ACL 1989. Amended 1991. 1992.
§8-6-600 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency:
Department of Pollution Control and
Ecology: permitting, licensing, certifi-
cation and grant programs. §8-1-202.
Secondary Agencies:
State Marketing Board for Recyclables
Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecolo-
gy Commission: develops state solid
waste management plan, promulgates
regulations. §8-1-203, 207(4).
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
Goal is to recycle 30% of 1991 municipal
solid waste stream by 1995, and 40% by
2000. §8-9-101.
Planning Requirements
A statewide solid waste management plan
must be developed. §8-6-207(4).
Each solid waste district, as well as each
municipality (and county if necessary),
must prepare a solid waste management
system plan, which must include a recy-
cling program. §8-6-717, 8-6-604. 8-6-
211(a), 8-6-212.
Each regional solid waste district must
prepare a regional needs assessment which
must be updated biennially. §8-6-704(a)(2),
8-6-716(b).
Regionalization Provisions
Regional approaches to solid waste man-
agement are preferred and encouraged. §8-
6-602(b).
Eight regional solid waste management
districts have been created, with the ability
to create more. §8-6-703(a). Municipalities
and counties may enter agreements with
each other or private persons to provide
solid waste management system. §8-6-
211 (a), 8-6-212(a)(3).
Flow Control Provisions
Regional solid waste management districts
may require that "solid waste generated or
-------
collected within the boundaries of the
district be delivered to a particular project
for disposal, treatment, or other han-
dling...", although the district cannot impair
contracts existing as of 3/26/91. §8-6-712(-
a)(l). However, regional solid waste man-
agement districts may not "prevent a per-
son generating or collecting recyclable
materials from delivering the recyclable
materials to a recycling facility of the
generator's or collector's choice." §8-6-
720(e).
Any county or municipality that is a mem-
ber of a sanitation authority may "re-
quire...that solid waste generated or collect-
ed, within the corporate boundaries of the
municipality or county be delivered to a
particular project for disposal, treatment, or
other handling" § 14-233-114(b)(l).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants to Local Government: Grants
from the Solid Waste Management and
Recycling Fund are available to local gov-
ernments to develop solid waste manage-
ment plans that integrate recycling, public
information and education programs that
encourage "waste reduction and stimulate
demand for products produced from recy-
cled materials," "recycling program and
market development costs," and facilities
"provided that the legislative preference for
regional or multi-county solid waste man-
agement planning is implemented in the
administration of this grant program." §8-
6-609. To be eligible for a grant, the appli-
cant must have a solid waste plan on file
within one year following grant award.
develop recycling program in 3 years after
award of grant, actively seek to market or
reuse recycled materials in 3 years follow-
ing grant award. §8-6-610. Grants are also
available for aid in developing regional
needs assessments and their updates. §8-6-
705(c). Regional solid waste districts are
eligible for grants to deal with waste tires.
§8-9-405.
State Loans to Local Governments: No
provisions.
Fees
Municipalities and counties may collect
fees to support their solid waste manage-
ment system. §8-6-21 l(b), 8-6-212(b)."
Regional solid waste management districts
may charge fees for handling the district's
solid waste. §8-6-714.
The state imposes a landfill disposal fee of
25 cents for each uncompacted cubic yard
of solid waste and 45 cents for each com-
pacted yard (or $1.50 per ton). §8-6-606.
The fees go into the Solid Waste Manage-
ment and Recycling Fund for grants and
administrative' support of the State Market-
ing Board for Recyclables. §8-6-607.
The state also imposes a landfill disposal
fee of 15 cents per uncompacted cubic
yard of solid waste and 30 cents per com-
pacted yard (or $1,00 per ton) to fund the
Landfill Post-Closure Trust Fund. §8-6-
1003.
Financial \ssurance
All applicants for a solid waste manage-
ment system and disposal sites must post
bond to assure compliance with state laws
and to provide for proper closure of a
disposal site. §8-6-213(b). A municipality
or county, in lieu of a performance bond.
may execute a "contract of obligation" with
-------
department of Pollution Control and Ecolo-
gy which allows department to collect up
to $1500 per acre from "any funds being
disbursed or to be disbursed from the state
to the municipality or county on failure of
the municipality or county to close the
disposal operation properly." §8-6-213(c).
In addition, permit applicants must show
adequate financial responsibility for opera-
tion, closure and post-closure care of facili-
ty and corrective action before permit will
be issued. §8-6-216.
Other Requirements
Legislation Requires:
State agencies and schools must estab-
lish a source separation and recycling
program. §8-9-203.
State Marketing Board for Recyclables
must develop marketing plan for Ar-
kansas recyclables. §8-9-20 l(h).
Promotion of public education on need
for waste reduction and recycling. §8-
9-201.
Public notice and hearing required
before disposal site permit applicant
receives certificate of need. §8-6-706-
(d).
Public participation required before
regional solid waste management dis-
trict can adopt regional needs assess-
ments, findings, or reports. §8-6-708.
State must establish standards for cer-
tification of solid waste disposal system
operators. §8-6-210(13).
Legislation Permits:
State agencies, cities and counties may
provide for preferential purchasing of
recycled products. §8-9-204.
Legislation Does Not Require:
State or local procurement of recycled
products.
Conflict resolution procedures.
Full cost accounting.
Universal collection.
Unique Features
Arkansas, like Mississippi and West Vir-
ginia, is one of the few southern states to
take a "bottoms up" approach to construct-
ing a state solid waste management plan.
The Arkansas state plan is to be developed
in cooperation with local governments and
solid waste boards.
2- 0
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Florida
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Resource Recovery and Management
§403-702 et seq. 1988. Amended 1992.
1993.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agencv:
Department of Environmental Regula-
tion
Secondary Agencies:
Division of Purchasing of the Depart-
ment of Management Services
Recycled Markets Advisory Committee:
coordinates for state agencies and pri-
vate sector on policy and strategic
planning for developing new markets
and expanding existing markets for
recovered materials. Committee shall
develop a plan by October 1, 1993 to
implement these goals. §288.1185.
Department of Agriculture and Con-
sumer Services: promotes composting.
§403.714(4), (5).
Florida Packaging Council (within
Department of Environmental Regula-
tion): determines that recycled material
content goals are technically sound and
achievable. §403.7197 sec. 34.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
County's solid waste management and
recycling programs must be designed to
meet goals for 30% reduction1 of municipal
solid waste by end of 1994. §?403.706(4)-
(a). No more than 1/2 the goal may be met
with yard trash, white goods, construction
debris and tires. Department may modify
die reduction goal for a county if the coun-
ty demonstrates that the achievement of the
goal would have adverse effect on financial
obligations that .are directly related to a
waste-tOHsnergyffacility owned or operated
by county and "the county cannot remove
normally combustible materials from solid
waste that is to be processed at a waste-to-
energy facility because of the need to
maintain a sufficient amount of solid waste
to ensure the financial viability of the
facility." §403.706(6).
Note: Florida's 1988 legislation set up a
30% recycling goal. This was modified in
1993 amendments to be a 30% waste re-
duction goal. Each county must still initiate
a recycling program. §403.706(2). And. the
30% waste reduction goal can be met using
recycling and other waste reduction meth-
ods. In addition, county waste management
and recycling programs must be designed
to "recover a majority" of newspaper.
-------
aluminum and steel cans, glass and plastic
bottles and offer them for recycling. §403-
.706(2)(b).
A litter reduction goal of 50% from 1/1/94
to 1/1/97 is established. §403.4131(8).
Planning Requirements
Department of Environmental Regulation
must develop state solid waste management
program, to be updated every 3 years.
§403.704(1).
No specific local planning provision is
found in Honda's solid waste legislation
because of the comprehensive planning
requirements found elsewhere in Florida's
code. However, the solid waste legislation
does require that local government pro-
grams include the following:
County's solid waste management and
recycling program must be designed to
reduce amount of solid waste generated
within the county to meet the goal for
reduction of municipal solid waste. The
goal should be to reduce by at least
30% by 1994. §403.706(4)(a).
Each county must initiate a recyclable
materials recycling program which is
designed to recover majority of news-
paper, aluminum cans, steel cans, glass
and plastic bottles. §403.706(2). Each
must consider plans for composting.
§403.706(2)(d).
"Each county shall ensure, to the maxi-
mum extent possible, that municipali-
ties within its boundaries participate in
the preparation and implementation of
recycling and solid waste management
programs through interlocal agreements..."
§403.706(3).
Regionalization Provisions
The state solid waste management program
must "encourage coordinated local activity
for solid waste management within a com-
mon geographical area:" §403.705(l)(b).
See also §705(3)(a). Counties and munici-
palities are encouraged to form cooperative
arrangements for implementing recycling
programs. §403.706(2). See also §403.706-
(11).
Counties with populations under 50.000 are
encouraged to develop regional approach to
administering their litter control programs.
§403.4131(5).
Flow Control Provisions
"Nothing in this act or in any local or
ordinance shall be construed to limit the
free flow of splid waste across municipal
or county boundaries provided such solid
waste is transported or disposed of pursu-
ant to the provisions of this part. However,
any local government that undertakes re-
source recovery from of [sic] solid waste
pursuant to general law or special act may
control the collection and disposal of solid
waste,...which is generated within the terri-
torial boundaries of such local government
and other, local governments which enter
into interlocal agreements for the disposal
of solid waste ..." §403.713(1). "Any local
government which undertakes resource
recovery from of [sic] solid waste pursuant
to general law or special act may institute
a flow control ordinance for the purpose of
ensuring that the resource recovery facility
receives an adequate quantity of solid
waste from sold waste generated within its
-------
jurisdiction. Such authority shall not extend
to recovered materials, whether separated
at the point of generation or after collec-
tion...." §403.713(2).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern*
ments
State Grants:
Department must manage grant pro-
gram from Solid Waste Management
Trust Fund for recycling, litter control,
composting, and programs which pro-
vide for safe and proper management
of solid waste. §403.704(22). Depart-
ment will develop grant program to
help local governments operate solid
waste management recycling and edu-
cation programs. §403.7095(1). De-
partment may reduce, eliminate, or
place conditions upon grants for recy-
cling or solid waste reduction projects
if insufficient progress is being made in
meeting goal set forth in §403.706(4),
or in procuring products with recycled
content or in complying with full cost
accounting requirements, or for failure
in meeting other requirements. §403-
.7095(e). Also, if Department finds that
local government's recycling program
"has failed to consider the use of recy-
cling efforts of the private sector"
Department may restrict grants to that
government. §403.7095(6)(j).
County may use solid waste and recy-
cling grants for purchasing scales,
annual solid waste management pro-
gram operating costs, planning, con-
struction, education, recycling demon-
stration projects. §403.7095(7)(b).
Counnes without scales at county oper-
ated facilities are not able to use the
grant. §403.7095(7)(b). Solid waste
recycling grants available to local gov-
ernments for capital costs and operating
subsides. §403.7095(4).
Department shall issue solid waste
education grants to local governments
to promote recycling, volume reduction,
proper disposal of solid wastes, and
market development for recyclable
materials. §403.7095(5). Department
will establish grants for local govern-
ments to implement litter control and
prevention programs. These grants shall
be incorporated as pan of the recycling
and education grants. §403.4131(5).
Counties are eligible for grants from
Waste tire account (which is funded by
fee of $1.00 on each new tire sold)
§403.719, 403.718. Grants available to
local governments to encourage collec-
tion, reuse and proper disposal of used
oil. §403,763.
State Loans:
No provisions.
Fees
Honda has instituted an advanced disposal
fee program for containers. A disposal fee
is imposed on a container if that type of
container is not being recycled at sustained
rates of at least 50% of the quantity sold
within the state. The fee is I cent begin-
ning 10/1/93, and increases to 2 cents
beginning 1/1/95. §403.7197. The fee is
collected by distributors from dealers.
Provisions are made for certain exemptions
and refunds.
-------
Florida has also imposed newsprint dispos-
al fees of 50 cents per ton. which will be
rescinded for the following year if Depart-
ment of Environmental Regulation deter-
mines that the newsprint sold within the
state is being recycled at 50% or more. If
not recycling at 50% by 10/1/93, then fee
increases to $1.00; if not by 60% by 1999.
then fee increases to $2.00. §403.7195.
Goals and penalties for not meeting these
goals are established for consumption of
recycled fiber. §403.7195.
Each county and municipality which pro-
vides collection services "is encouraged" to
charge fees which are volume or weight
based, collected from each user. §403.-
7049(4).
Counties and municipalities may impose
fee to be used for recycling program. §-
403.7049(5). Counties may charge reason-
able fees for disposal of solid waste at
their facilities. §403.706(1). Counties can
use infrastructure surtax to finance closure
of county or municipally owned solid
waste facilities. §212.055.
Financial Assurance
Owner/operator shall establish a fee to
ensure financial resources for proper clo-
sure of landfill. §403.7125(3). The monies
raised go into escrow account Landfill
management escrow account requirements
are in addition to provisions that relate to
raising revenues for landfill closure. §403.-
7125(3)(d). Owner/operator may establish
proof of financial responsibility in lieu of
establishing a fee. Such proof may include
surety bonds, certificates of deposit, letters
of credit, or other that show he "has suffi-
cient financial resources to covers, at mini-
mum, the costs of complying with landfill
closure requirements." §403.7125(4). Coun-
ty can use infrastructure surtax to finance
closure of county or municipally owned
solid waste facilities. §212.055. (Note: The
financial assurance requirements apply to
government-operated landfills as well us
private.)
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle and insti-
tute solid waste reduction program.
§403.714(1), 403.714(1 )(d).
State agencies must use dompost prod-
ucts when they can be substituted for,
at no greater cost than, regular soil
amendment products. §403.714(4).
State agency procurement procedures
must not discriminate against products
witfi recycled content and must ensure
that each agency purchase materials
that are recyclable to the maximum
extent economically feasible. §287.045.
Market analysis and development for
recycled and recovered materials. §288-
. 1185, 403.704( 18), 403.714(2).
Public education program. §403.705(3)-
(g), sec. 35(2)(a) of 1993 amendments,
403.714(6)(b), 403.753.
Public hearing on rules to implement
state solid waste plan. §403.704(1).
Full cost accounting and notification of
each user. §403.7049(1).
Operator of landfill must complete
training course. §403.716(3).
-------
Ban on landfill disposal of batteries,
used oil. scrap tires and yard waste.
§403.708(15), and 403.708(3)(c).
Legislation allows:
Counties may require that any person
within county show that his solid waste
is being properly disposed. §125.01(k).
Legislation does not require:
Conflict resolution.
Unique Features
1993 Amendments: Florida made signifi-
cant changes in its statutory scheme for
solid waste management in 1993. The state
changed its goal from a 30% recycling
goal to a 30% waste reduction goal. §403.-
706(4). The Advance Disposal Fee pro-
gram was modified in a number of ways.
The fee is to be collected by distributors
from dealers, rather than by retailers from
consumers. §403.7197(6)(a). Exemptions
are created to encourage industries to use
recycled materials in their containers and
for those industries that export containers
out-of-state. Another important addition in
the 1993 amendments was the provision
allowing counties and municipalities to use
the infrastructure surtax to finance closure
activities. §212.055. Local governments are
also given the authority to require source
separation. §403.706(22).
Florida's Advance Disposal Fee program is
unique among the southern states. Created
in 1988, it has been extensively amended
to provide for exemptions, clarifications,
refinements, and to alter the date of imple-
mentation.
Very detailed instructions concerning pro-
curement of products containing recycled
material or that are recyclable. Includes
ability to consider life-cycle costing when
evaluating a bid. §287.045(5).
Local governments have authority to re-
quire all users to establish programs for
separation of recyclable materials. §403.-
706(22).
1993 Amendments regulate Environmental
representations. §403.7193.
Comprehensive illegal dumping, litter, and
marine debris control and prevention pro-
gram established, sec. 35 of 1993 amend-
ments. It must include: statewide public
awareness and education campaign; en-
forcement provisions and officers; local
illegal dumping, litter, and marine debris
control and prevention programs at county
level; adopt-a-highway program; highway
beautification; and adopt-a-shore program.
sec. 69 of 1993 Amendments authorizes
Enterprise Florida to contract with manu-
facturer of plastic products with recycled
content and which participates in plastic
recycling business venture. Department of
Corrections and Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services will participate
through Enterprise Florida as customers of
the business venture.
Compost standards established. §403.7043.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Georgia
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Georgia Comprehensive Solid Waste Man-
agement Act. 1990. Amended 1991, 1992.
§12-8-20 etseq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency
Environmental Protection Division of
the Department of Natural Resources:
Enforces regulations, orders and per-
mits; research into solid waste manage-
ment practices; disperse funds and
technical advice.
Department of Community Affairs:
State plan with EPD; local/regional
planning process; waste reduction and
recycling education and technical assis-
tance.
Secondary Agencies
Recycling Market Development Coun-
cil: Determines what must be done to
facilitate development and expansion of
markets for recovered materials.
Georgia Building Authority: Establishes
and coordinates statewide recycling
program for state agencies.
Department of Administrative Services:
Procurement requirements. •
Georgia Environmental Facilities Au-
thority: Provides low interest loans for
solid waste management projects.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Qoals
General Assembly intends that "every
effort be undertaken" to reduce on a state-
wide per capita basis the amount of munic-
ipal solid waste received at disposal facili-
ties during fiscal year 1992 by 25% by
July 1, 1996. Credit will be given local
governments for any reductions prior to
1992. §12-8-2l(£).
/•"
Planning Requirements
State solid waste management plan is due
by January 1, 1991. §12-8-31.
Each city or county shall develop or be
included in a comprehensive solid waste
management plan by July 1, 1993. §12-8-
31.1
Regionalization Provisions
The State plan shall include procedures for
ensuring cooperative efforts on solid waste
management planning by the state, regional
development centers, local governments,
groups of local governments, and private
-------
companies. The State plan shall also in-
clude a description of the ways in which it
will encourage local governments to pursue
regional approaches. § 12-8-3 l(a)(5).
Regional solid waste management
authorities are authorized. §12-8-50 et
seq.
Flow Control Provisions
It is the policy of Georgia that any regional
solid waste management authority shall be
authorized to enter into agreements provid-
ing for an exclusive right for the authority
to collect, or dispose of solid waste. This
cannot be done, however, for recovered
materials or recyclables. §12-8-5 l(b).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants: State may make grants to any
local government, agency, public authority,
agency, or commission to assist in the con-
struction of solid waste handling systems.
§12-8-37.1 (a).
Grants from the Solid Waste Trust Fund
may be used for: cleanup of solid waste
disposal facilities; development and imple-
mentation of solid waste enforcement pro-
grams for abatement of illegal dumping of
solid waste; implementation of innovative
technologies for recycling and reuse of
waste; and for efforts to promote waste
reduction, recycling, and recycling market
development. §12-8-37.1(c).
State Loans: Loans may be made from the
Solid Waste Trust Fund to be used for
similar purposes as grants from the same
fund (described above). §12-8-37. l(c).
The Georgia Environmental Facilities Au-
thority can make loans to local govern-
ments for solid waste projects. §50-23-1
through 50-23-20.
Fees
Effective January 1, 1992, each local gov-
ernment or combination of local govern-
ments or special districts or authority
which operates a municipal solid waste
disposal facility is required to impose a
cost reimbursement fee upon each ton of
municipal solid waste regardless of its
source. §12-8-39(a) and (c).
A minimum of $1.00 per ton shall be paid
into a local restricted account to be used
for solid waste management purposes only.
§12-849(b) and (c).
Effective January 1, 1992, host local gov-
ernment must impose a surcharge of $1.00
per ton on solid waste facilities operated
by private companies. This surcharge is to
be used to offset the impact of the facility,
public education efforts, the cost of solid
waste management, and administration of
solid waste management plan. §12-8-39(d).
After July 1, 1992, the Division shall im-
pose a surcharge of 50 cents per ton of
solid waste disposed on all owners or
operators of solid waste disposal facility.
§12-8-39(e). This surcharge is credited to
the general fund to be used for the hazard-
ous waste trust fund to evaluate, prioritize,
and clean up hazardous waste sites. The
surcharge expires July 1, 2003 unless reim-
-------
posed by General Assembly. §12-8-39(0
and (g).
Financial Assurance
Operators of solid waste handling facility
must demonstrate adequate financial re-
sponsibility to ensure maintenance, closure,
and post-closure care of facility and to
carry out any necessary corrective action.
§12-8-27.2(a).
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle. §12-8-36.
State procurement preferences. §12-8-
35(a).
Market development for recyclables.
§12-8-33.
Public education. §12-8-31, §50-8-7.3.
Public involvement in permitting and
siting process. §12-8-24, §12-8-26, §12-
8-32(c).
Conflict resolution procedures. §12-8-
32.
Full cost accounting. §12-8-39.2.
Certification of operators. §12-8-24.1.
Legislation does not require:
Universal collection.
Unique Features
After April I, 1990, no permit shall be
issued for solid waste disposal facility
that is within 0.5 mile of an adjoining
county without the approval of the
adjoining county, unless applicant
shows that there are no alternatives.
§12-8-25(a)(3).
Major responsibilities split between the
Environmental Protection Division
(regulatory responsibilities) and the
Department of Community Affairs
(planning and some recycling and
waste reduction responsibilities). Geor-
gia and Tennessee are the only states to
split the responsibilities in this way.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Kentucky
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Solid Waste ACL 1991. §224.43-010 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency: Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection Cabinet.
Secondary Agencies:
Economic Development Cabinet, Recy-
cling Brokerage Authority: Provides a
marketing mechanism for recyclables.
§ 154.12-202 et seq.
Kentucky Infrastructure Authority:
Provides grants and loans to local gov-
ernments for solid waste management
projects. §224A.011.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
The state goal is, by July 1, 1997, to re-
duce by 25% the amount by weight of
municipal solid waste disposed at munici-
pal solid waste disposal facilities, as com-
pared to fiscal year 1993 on a statewide
per capita basis. §224.43-010(4).
Planning Requirements
A final State comprehensive solid waste
management plan is due by March 1, 1992.
It is to be updated every 3 years. §224.43-
310.
Local plan, submitted by counties or waste
management districts, is required and is
composed of 2 parts. Part I is due by Octo-
ber 1, 1991 and Part n is due by January
1, 1993. Local plans are to be updated
every 5 years. §224.43-340, §224.43-345-
(2).
Regionalization Provisions
The legislative goal is for combinations of
counties and waste management districts to
have the primary responsibility for solid
waste management. The state management
plan is to encourage regional alternatives
for waste reduction and management. Cou-
nties are authorized to contract with one
another in order to regionalize solid waste
management to the maximum extent practi-
cable. In addition, a single county or, two
or more counties, may create a waste man-
agement district. See §109.011(6), 224.43-
310(2)(e), 109.041(12), and 109.115(1).
Flow Control Provisions
/
No person can transport out-of-state waste
to the state unless it has consented in writ-
ing to the jurisdiction of Kentucky courts,
and service of process for any civil or
criminal proceeding related to the waste.
§224-43-380.
-------
Any county or waste management district
may require the use of any solid waste
management facility. §109.059.
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants: Eligible recipients may re-
ceive "financial assistance" equal to maxi-
mum of 50% of cost of planning activity.
§224.43-720.
In addition, a solid waste grant program is
established, jointly administered by the
Natural Resources Cabinet and the Ken-
tucky Infrastructure Authority. Grants are
to be used to defray the capital costs asso-
ciated with the promotion of recycling,
universal collection and other similar solid
waste management activities. Grantees
must provide a "reasonable and appropriate
matching contribution". The grants may not
exceed $50,000 per county. The appropria-
tions to the Cabinet are the source of the
grant funds. §224A.280.
State Loans: The solid waste revolving
fund is to be used for the construction or
acquisition of solid waste projects when a
borrower is unable to finance the entire
project from its own resources through
commercial credit at reasonable rates and
under reasonable terms, or through other
public grant or loan programs. The loans
are limited to $200,000 per county. The
solid waste revolving fund is established in
the state treasury. §224A-270.
Fees
A county or waste management district
may levy an annual tax of up to ten cents
on each one hundred dollars of assessed
valuation of real property within the area
subject to taxation for county purposes.
The proceeds of the tax shall be used for
solid waste management expenses of the
area and for redemption of any bonds
issued. §109.056(1). A county or waste
management district, in lieu of or in addi-
tion to this tax may "finance the mainte-
nance, operation, and capital acquisition
costs of the area by fees to be collected
from all persons receiving services from
the area." §109.056(2).
Counties are authorized to Charge a reason-
able fee to transporters for the handling of
their waste at a solid waste management
facility. §109.041(8).
Financial Assurance
An operator must file a bond to provide
financial assurance for closure of a facility.
§224.40-650/1).
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle. §224.10-
650.
Market analysis and development and
marketing assistance for recyclables.
§224.10-650(4).
Public education. §224.10-620.
Public involvement in development of
local solid waste management plans.
§224.43-345(1 )(o).
-------
Full cost accounting. §224.43-345(1 )(i).
Universal collection. §224.43.315)(1).
Operator certification. §224.40-605.
Legislation does not require:
State or local procurement preferences.
Conflict resolution procedures.
Unique Features
Kentucky's landfill regulations are more
stringent than Subtitle D's and the state,
early on, asked local governments to deter-
mine whether they would conform to new
requirements. This has put Kentucky ahead
of other states in the region in meeting
design and construction standards.
Kentucky has a proposed manifest system
for solid waste. §224.43-335.
Kentucky's Recycling Brokerage Authority
has broad responsibilities in marketing
recyclables.
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Mississippi
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Mississippi Comprehensive Multimedia
Waste Minimization Act of 1990. §49-31-1
etseq. Amended -1992.
Nonhazardous Solid Waste Planning Act of
1991. §17-17-201 etseq.
Mississippi Regional Solid Waste Manage-
ment Authority ACL 1991. §17-17-301 et
seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency:
Department of Environmental Quality
Secondary Agencv:
Department of Economic and Commu-
nity Development
Recycling Market Development Coun-
cil
Department of Education
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
A state goal of reducing and minimizing
waste by 25% by 1/1/96, using "reasonable
objectives and schedules" is established.
The State nonhazardous solid waste man-
agement plan will develop strategies for
achieving the waste reduction goal. § 17-
17-221(2)(d). §17-17-203(2)(b), 17-17-
Planning Requirements
Department of Environmental Quality must
develop state nonhazardous solid waste
management plan which will include the
approved local plans. §17-17-221. This
plan must be developed within 15 months
of publication of final Subtitle D regula-
tions and must be updated at least every 5
years. §17-17-221.
Department must conduct comprehensive
study of waste minimization activities in
Mississippi. This study must be updated
every 5 years. §49-31-13.
Local or regional solid waste management
plans are required within 9 months of
publication of final Subtitle D regulations.
§17-17-227. These plans must be revised at
least everts years. §17-17-227.
Regionalization Provisions
Counties may enter agreements with each
other to form regional solid waste manage-
ment authorities which will prepare a solid
waste management plan to cover all coun-
-------
ties and municipalities within the authori-
ty's boundaries. §17-17-227(4), 17-17-33.
Flow Control Provisions
A regional solid waste management author-
ity may determine that mandatory flow of
solid waste to its facility is necessary to
ensure the viability of the facility if the
authority first demonstrate that it has con-
sidered using facilities which meet federal
and state regulations and in existence by
April 12. 1991 and that its decision not to
use the existing facility is "based on the
fact that such facility is environmentally
unsound, costs for use of such facility is
inconsistent with comparable facilities
within the State of Mississippi, or the use
of such facility is not consistent with' the
local nonhazardous solid waste manage-
ment plan." §17-17-319(2).
A county or municipality participating in a
regional authority has authority to require
that all municipal solid waste generated
within its boundaries and placed in the
waste stream be sent to a designated mu-
nicipal solid waste management facility.
§17-17-319(4). This power does not pro-
hibit the "source separation of materials for
purposes of recycling from municipal solid
waste prior to collection of such municipal
solid waste for management, or prohibit
collection of municipal solid waste from
recycling materials or limit access to such
materials as an incident to collection of
such municipal solid waste..." §17-17-319-
(4).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants: No provisions.
State Loans: No provisions.
Fees
Each owner or operator of a commercial
nonhazardous solid waste management
facility must pay to the State $1.00 per ton
of municipal solid waste generated and
managed in the state. §17-17-219(1).
Owner/operator must also "pay to the State
Tax Commission an amount equal to the
greater of the per-ton fee imposed on the
management of out-of-state nonhazardous
solid waste by the state from which the
nonhazardous solid waste originated or the
per-ton fee, if any, imposed on the man-
agement of nonhazardous solid waste by
this state. Such sum shall be based on the
total amounts of nonhazardous solid waste
managed at the facility during the preced-
ing Calendar year..." §17-17-221(2)(b), see
also§l7-17-53(3)(b).
Financial Assurance
After October 9, 1993, owner of landfill
must ensure it has the financial resources
for proper closure of landfill and post-
closure monitoring and remediation by
either establishing a fee or offering some
other proof of financial responsibility. §17-
17-233. Or, owner may establish proof of
financial responsibility in lieu of instituting
these fees. §17-17-235. These provisions
apply to counties and municipalities as
well as private landfill operators. §17-17-
205(e).
-------
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle. §49-31-
15.
Analysis and development of market
for recycled material. §49-31-17.
Public education on benefits of source
separation and recycling. §49-31-17(4)-
(h).
Development of curriculum for waste
minimization awareness program. §49-
31-19.
Public hearing after solid waste man-
agement plan is completed. §17-17-
227(5).
Full cost accounting and notification of
public. §17-17-347.
Local governments must provide for
collection and disposal of garbage. §17-
17-5.
Operators of solid waste management
facilities must be certified after 10/317-
93. §21-27-211(2).
Ban on landfill disposal of lead acid
batteries. §17-17-429(1).
Legislation does not require:
State procurement of products with
recycled content.
Conflict resolution procedures.
Bans on landfilling of used oil and yard
waste.
Unique Features
Mississippi has a "bottom up" planning
process similar to Arkansas and West
Virginia.
Creation of "The Right-Way-To-Throw-
Away Program" which is designed to
ensure proper collection and manage-
ment of Household hazardous waste.
§17-17-441.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
North Carolina
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Solid Waste Management Act. 1989.
Amended 1991. §130A-309.01 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency
Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resource, Division of Solid
Waste Management and Office of
Waste Reduction.
Secondary Agencies
Department of Administration:
Develops state agency recycling
programs.
Department of Commerce: Assists
and encourage recycling industry in
the state.
Department of Public Instruction:
Develops guidelines for recycling in
public school systems.
North Carolina Solid Waste Man-
agement Capital Projects Financing
Agency: Administers loans from
Solid Waste Management Loan
Fund.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
The goal is to reduce municipal solid waste
stream, primarily through source reduction,
reuse, recycling and composting, on a per
capita basis: 25% by June 30, 1993, 40%
by June 30, 2001. Baseline year is July 1,
1991 through June 30, 1992. &130A-309.-
04(c).
Planning Requirements
State comprehensive solid waste manage-
ment plan is required by March 1, 1991,
and is to be updated every 3 years.
§130A-309.06.
Local or regional comprehensive solid
waste management plans are required and
must conform with state plan and waste
reduction goals. The local plans shall be
updated every 2 years. §130A-309.04.
Regionalized on Provisions
A local government may join with another
to develop and Implement a solid waste
management plan. Moreover, the slate
encourages local governments "to the max-
imum extent practicable" to implement
joint recycling and solid waste manage-
ment programs. In addition, two or more
units of local government may create a
regional solid waste management authority.
See §153A-421(c), 130A-309A(b), 130A-
-------
309B, l30A-294(5a).
Flow Control Provisions
Local governments may require that all
solid waste generated within their service
area be delivered to the permitted solid
waste management facility serving that
area. If necessary, the local government
may displace competition. §130A-291(b).
Local government units can require that
"all solid waste generated within the desig-
nated geographic area that is placed in the
waste stream for disposal be collected,
transported, stored and disposed of at a
permitted solid waste management
facility...serving such area." §130A-294(5-
b).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants to Local Government: Grants
from the Department may be made to •
encourage collection, reuse and proper
disposal of used oil. §130A-309.22.
State Loans to Local Governments: North
Carolina Solid Waste Management Loan
Program is established. The state will make
loans from this fund to finance acquisition
or construction of a solid waste manage-
ment program (includes paying for equip-
ment, leachate collection, and liners).
§1591-7.
Fees
A county or municipality which owns or
operates a solid waste management facility
may charge solid waste disposal fee which
may vary based on a number of factors,
including the amount, characteristics, and
form of recyclable materials present in the
solid waste. A county or municipality may
also impose a fee for the services it pro-
vides with regard to collection, processing
or disposal of solid waste; the revenues
generated from this fee is to be used for
developing and implementing a recycling
program. §130A-309.08(d), (e).
Financial Assurance
Every owner or operator of a landfill shall
establish a fee or surcharge to establish
financial responsibility for the proper clo-
sure of the landfill. (An owner or operator
may establish proof of financial resources
in lieu of a fee or surcharge by way of
bonds, letters of credit, securities, corporate
guarantees, certified deposits.) §130A-
309.27(c).
Other Requirements
Legislation Requires:
State agencies must implement recy-
cling programs. §130A-309.14.
Implementation of recycling market
analysis and development. §130A-309.-
Development of public education pro-
gram on recycling and waste reduction.
§130A-309.07(7), 130A-309.14(g),
130A-309.16.
Full cost accounting and notification of
public. §l30A-309.08(b).
-------
Certification of operators of solid waste
management facilities after January 1,
1996. §130A-309.25.
Legislation Does Not Require:
State or local procurement of recy-
cled goods;
Conflict resolution procedures.
Unique Features
North Carolina's original comprehen-
sive solid waste management legislation
was amended in 1991 to change from a
recycling goal to a waste reduction
goal.
North Carolina has the most compre-
hensive solid waste management plan
in the region.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
South Carolina
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
South Carolina Solid Waste Policy and
Management Act of 1991. §44-96-10 et
seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency
South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control and Office
of Solid Waste Reduction and Recy-
cling.
Secondary Agencies
State Solid Waste Advisory Council:
Advises Department on state plan and
preparation of annual reports.
Recycling Market Development Coun-
cil: Established within the State De-
velopment Board.
Division of General Services: Encour-
ages procurement of recycled goods by
state agencies.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
The State goal is to reduce, on a statewide
per capita basis, the amount of solid waste
received at municipal solid waste landfills
and any solid waste incinerators permitted
after May 1991 by 30%, calculated fay
weight, of the fiscal year 1993 solid waste
level, by May 27, 1997. No more than
50% of this goal may be met by removal
of yard trash, land clearing debris, white
goods, construction and demolition debris,
and waste tires from the waste stream.
§44-96-50(D).
It is also the goal of the State to recycle,
on a statewide basis, at least 2?5%, calculat-
ed by weight, of the total solid waste
stream generated in South Carolina by May
27, 1997. No more than 40% of this goal
may be met by removal of yard trash, land
clearing debris, and construction and de-
molition debris from the waste stream.
§44-96-SD.
Planning Requirements
A state comprehensive solid waste manage-
ment plan is required by November 1992.
§44-96-60(A).
Each county, individually or as part of a
region, must submit a local plan no later
than 15 months after the Department sub-
mits the state plan. §44-96-80(A).
Regionalization Provisions
State policy is to encourage a regional
approach to solid waste management. The
Department shall report by November 1992
on ways to encourage counties and munici-
palities to pursue a regional approach,
including incentives to encourage the
-------
siting, construction and operation of re-
gional facilities. Counties are encouraged
to form a region and submit a regional
plan. Local governments are also autho-
rized to enter into cooperative agreements
with each other to provide for collection,
separation, or recycling of solid waste. See
§44-96-50(0); §44-96-80(A), (G), (H); and
§44-96-270.
Flow Control Provisions
A $10.00 a ton fee is imposed on solid
waste generated out of state and disposed
of in South Carolina. If other state's fees
are higher, than that fee shall be imposed
instead. §44-96-80(L).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants: Grants from Solid Waste
Management Trust Fund shall be used to
help local governments carry out their
responsibilities under this chapter. Begin-
ning in 1997, at least 25% of the grant
funds must be bonus grants to local gov-
ernments that have met their solid waste
reduction and recycling goals. The Solid
Waste Management Trust Fund shall con-
sist of funds appropriated by the General
Assembly, contributions and grants from
public and private sources, funds generated
by out-of state disposal fee, fee on lead
acid batteries, and pan of the fee on tires.
§44-96-130(A), (D). See also §44-96-120.
Fees
Local governments may expend funds
received from any source to establish and
maintain regional facilities for collection,
separation or recycling of solid waste.
§44-96-80(H).
County or regional plan shall include de-
scription and estimate of sources and
amount of revenue available for new facili-
ties. §44-96-80(A)(7).
Financial Assurance
Regulations for new and existing solid
waste landfills are to include financial
responsibility requirements. §44-96-320
(B)(6) and 44-96-330(A)(8).
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
State agencies to recycle. §44-96-140.
S^ate and local procurement preferences
fey recycled goods. §44-96-140(0).
Market analysis and development for
recyclables. §44-96-70, §44-96-110(C).
Public education programs. §44-96-
100(10).
Public involvement in local planning
process. §44-96-80(N).
Conflict resolution procedures. §44-96-
470'.
Full cost accounting. §44-96-90.
Operator certification. §44-96-460(C).
f"/
-------
Legislation does not require:
Universal collection.
Unique Features
South Carolina has both waste reduction
and recycling goals and has included re-
strictions on the amount of the goals that
can be obtained by yard trash, construction
and demolition debris, land clearing debris,
and white goods.
It provides bonus grants to counties for
meeting the waste reduction goals.
South Carolina does not provide local
governments with specific flow control
authority.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Tennessee
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Tennessee Solid Waste Planning and Re-
covery Act. 1989. Amended 1992. §68-
211-601.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency
State Planning Office: Develops state
solid waste plan, and assists develop-
ment of regional solid waste plans;
develops guidelines for recycling in
state agencies and schools.
Department of Environment and Con-
servation: Supervises construction and
operation of disposal sites; administers
permit system; enforcement.
Secondary Agencies
Office of Cooperative Marketing for
Recyclables: Created within the De-
partment of Economic and Community
Development.
Recycling Market Advisory Council:
Assists Department of Economic and
Community Development in identifying
markets for recyclables.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
The State goal is to reduce by 25% the
amount of solid waste disposed of at mu-
nicipal solid waste disposal facilities and
incinerators, measured on a per capita basis
within Tennessee by weight, by December
31, 1995. The base year is 1989. §68-211-
861.
Each municipal solid waste region must
achieve this same goal. §68-21 l-815(b)(l-
0), and §68-211-861.
Planning Requirements
A State plan is required by January 1,
1991. The plan is to be revised every 5
years. §68-211-603.
Each municipal solid waste region must
submit a plan by December 31, 1993. The
plan is to be revised every 5 years. §68-
211-811.
Regionalization Provisions
Municipal solid waste regions, consisting
of 1 or more contiguous counties, shall be
established. Multi-county regions are pre-
ferred. To encourage regional use of solid
waste disposal facilities or incinerators, a
county whose facility is used by other
counties in the same region may impose a
-------
surcharge on waste received at its facility.
See §68-211-813, 68-21 l-835(e).
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
Flow Control Provisions
The legislation provides that a region,
authority, or publicly owned landfill may
exclude waste originating with entities
outside the region in order to effectuate its
solid waste management plan. §68-211-
814(b)(l)(B), §68-211-817, §68-211-907.
The region, however, may not restrict the
movement of recovered materials in the
region. §68-2 11-8 14(b)(5).
After the regional plan is approved, then
the region may regulate flow of waste
generated within the region, if, after one or
more public hearings, certain findings are
made. The region or solid waste authority
must demonstrate in writing that it has
considered using the municipal solid waste
management facilities in existence on 7/1-
791 which comply with Subtitle D. The
region must also show that its decision not
to use the existing facility is based on the
fact that the facility is environmentally
unsound or inadequate to meet the 10 year
capacity assurance plan; and costs of such
facility are inconsistent with comparable
facilities in Tennessee, or the existing
facility is operating in a manner inconsis-
tent with the plan. And, the region must
show that the waste subject to flow control
will be sent only to a facility that meets all
state and federal regulations. §68-211-
A solid waste authority may require the
disposal of any transported waste at a
specific solid waste disposal facility.
§68-211-907
State Grants: State will provide grants to
assist local governments to help cover the
costs of the acquisition, construction or
alteration of solid waste processing or
disposal facilities. §68-211-201. Grants
may be awarded from the Solid Waste
Management Fund to the University of
Tennessee county technical assistance
service, University of Tennessee municipal
technical advisory service, development
districts, the department of economic and
community development's division of local
planning to help regions develop solid
waste management plan. The Solid Waste
Management Fund is allocated from gener-
al appropriations. §68-211-822.
Initial planning grants, annual plan mainte-
nance grants, and planning assistance
grants from the Solid Waste Management
Fund may be awarded. §68-211-823.
Matching grants are available for estab-
lishing or upgrading convenience centers
(centers which receive household waste,
municipal solid waste, and recyclable
waste from the public with an attendant
present). §68-211-824.
Grants are available for the purchase of
equipment to establish or upgrade recycling
at public or not-for-profit recycling site.
§68-211-825.
Competitive grants for collection of house-
hold hazardous waste at a permanent site
as available to qualified municipalities.
§68-211-828.
-------
Department shall award grants for imple-
menting education program component of
the regional plan. §68-211-847.
Department shall provide grants from the
Solid Waste Management Fund to local
governments with more than 2 years of
remaining capacity for purchase of scales
for weighing waste. §68-21 l-862(c).
Department will provide mobile collection
units which will collect household hazard-
ous wastes on designated days in each
county. §68-211-829.
State Loans: State may make loans to any
municipal corporation or county for the
construction of landfills or energy recovery
or solid waste resource recovery facilities.
§68-211-402.
Fees
Effective July 1, 1991, each county, mu-
nicipality, or solid waste authority which
owns a municipal solid waste disposal
facility may impose a tipping fee upon
each ton of municipal solid waste. The
tipping fee "may be equal to, or a portion
of, the estimated cost of providing solid
waste management services or a per ton or
volume equivalent." Revenues from tipping
fees shall be used only for solid waste
management purposes. §68-211-835.
In addition to tipping fee, there will also
be charge a surcharge of 85 cents per ton
on each ton of municipal solid waste re-
ceived at all solid waste disposal facilities
or incinerators. Fees will go to the State
Solid Waste Management Fund. This sur-
charge expires June 30, 1996. §68-211-
835(d).
The host county to a regional disposal
facility or incinerator may impose a sur-
charge on solid waste received there.
Revenue produced shall be used for solid
waste management purposes or for purpos-
es related to offsetting costs incurred and
other impacts resulting from the county
being host §68-211-835(e).
A county, municipality or solid waste
authority, after a regional solid waste plan
is approved, may impose a surcharge on
each ton of municipal solid waste received
at disposal facility for expenditure for solid
waste collection or disposal and or a solid
waste disposal fee. §68-211-835(f).
A county, municipality, or solid waste
authority is also authorized to impose a
solid waste disposal fee which may be
used onlyuo establish and maintain solid
waste collectioa-and disposal services. The
amount of the fee shall bear a reasonable
relationship to the cost of providing the
solid waste disposal services. §68-211-
835(g).
State will charge a reasonable fee to offset
the expenses of registration of transporters
of solid waste. §68-211-852.
Financial Assurance
No provisions.
Other Requirements
-------
Legislation also requires:
State agencies must recycle. §68-207-
605.
State procurement preferences. §68-
211-606.
Market analysis and development for
recyclables. §68-211-826.
Public education. §68-211-842 through
845.
Public involvement in proposed con-
struction of new or expanding solid
waste facility. §68-211-708, §68-211-
814(b)(2)(A).
Full cost accounting. §68-211-874.
Operator certification. §68-211-853.
Legislation does not require:
Conflict resolution procedures.
Universal collection.
Unique Features
As with Georgia, Tennessee's solid waste
planning responsibilities are assigned to the
State Planning Office instead of an envi-
ronmental regulatory agency as in most
states.
Another unusual feature is the 85 cent
surcharge imposed by the State and used to
fund numerous grant programs, including
planning grants.
Like Alabama, Tennessee requires regional
solid waste assessments.
Tennessee has detailed statutory provisions
regarding flow control.
The Office, of Cooperative Marketing for
Recyclables may be similar to Kentucky's
Recycling Brokerage Authority.
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Texas
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Comprehensive Municipal Solid Waste
Management, Resource Recovery, and
Conservation Act. 1989. Amended 1991.
§363.001 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency: Texas Water Commission
(after August 31, 1993, to be known as the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission).
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
The State goal is to recycle at least 40% of
the State's total municipal solid waste
stream, measured in tons, by January I,
1994. §361.422.
The Commission shall establish a com-
posting program that will achieve at least a
15% reduction in the amount of the munic-
ipal solid waste stream disposed of in
landfills, by January 1, 1994. §361.428.
Planning Requirements
A state strategic solid waste plan is re-
quired and must be updated every 2 years.
§361.020.
Planning regions and local governments
must develop a solid waste management
plan. The Commission shall develop a
schedule for regional and local plans which
is based on the availability of funds for
financial assistance. §363.062, §363.063.
Regionalization Provisions
The legislative findings recognize that
combining smaller regional or countywide
systems may be more efficient. The Gover-
nor is to designate municipal solid waste
planning regions. Planning regions shall
develop regional solid waste management
plans. Planning regions may be divided
into subregions with each subregion devel-
oping its own plan. See §363.003(7), §363-
.004(11), §363.062, §363.0615(6).
Flow Control Provisions
County may prohibit disposal of solid
waste in county if disposal is a threat to
the public health, safety, and welfare.
§364.012.
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants? Commission may make
grants for solid waste planning, installation
of solid waste facilities, and administration
of solid waste programs. §361.031.
-------
Commission shall use Municipal Solid
Waste Management Planning Fund to help
local government and planning regions
develop plans. §363.092. Public agencies
and planning regions must match "at least
equally" the funds received. Council of
governments, cities and counties do not
have to match. §363.093(c). The Municipal
Solid Waste Management Fund is funded
by half the revenues generated by a state
fee on solid waste disposal in the state.
The fee is the greater of SO cents per ton
or, for compacted waste, 50 cents per cubic
ton, or for uncompacted solid waste, 10
cents per cubic yard received for disposal
at a landfill. §361.013., §361.014.
Fees
A public agency may charge a fee for solid
waste disposal services. §364.034(a)(3).
The revenues from the public agency's
solid waste disposal fund, and any taxes,
must be sufficient to pay the expense of
operating and maintaining the solid waste
disposal service and obligations on bonds.
§364.035(b).
A public agency may "collect fees, rates,
charges, rentals, and other amounts for
services or facilities provided under or in
connection with a contract." §363.1 19(e).
The State will charge annual registration
fee on transporters of solid waste which is
reasonably related to volume and/or type of
waste. Fee is between $25 to $500. §361.0-
Financial Assurance
No provisions.
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires!
State agencies recycle. §361.425.
State and local procurement preferenc-
es. §361.426.
Market analysis and development for
recyclables. §361.423.
Public education. §361.424.
Public involvement in facility permit-
ting procedure. §361.069.
Conflict resolution procedures. §361.0-
63.
Universal collection. §363.113.
Legislation floes not require:
Full cost accounting.
Operator certification (although is en-
couraged at §361.027).
Unique Features
The Texas legislative scheme is unique in
that it requires both a regional and a local
plan.
The governor designates solid waste man-
agement regions.
Annual state registration fee for solid waste
haulers.
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
Virginia
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Virginia Waste Management Act 1988.
Amended 1991, 1992. §10.1-1400 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agencies
Department of Waste Management: Issues
permits; encourages recycling; management
and supervision under regulations; develops
model recycling program for state agen-
cies.
Secondary Agencies
Department of Economic Development:
Partial responsibility for encouraging
recycling industries in the state.
Virginia Resources Authority: Adminis-
ters the Solid Waste or Recycling Re-
volving Fund.
Department of Education: Partial re-
sponsibility for developing recycling
education guidelines for schools.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
Local plans must include provisions for
achieving the minimum recycling rates of
10% by 1991, 15% by 1993 and 25% by
1995. §10.1-1411.
Planning Requirements
State plan is required. §10.1-1402(4).
Local and regional plans are required.
§10.1-1411.
Regionalization Provisions
The governor may designate regional boun-
daries, and the local governments within
that region will be responsible for the
development and implementation of a
comprehensive regional solid waste man-
agement plan. §10.1-1411.
The Board will show a preference for
regional projects when awarding loans and
grants from the Solid Waste or Recycling
Revolving Fund. §62.1-241.8.
Flow Control Provisions
Qualifying local governments may require
that all or a'portion of the garbage generat-
ed or disposed of in its jurisdiction be
delivered to the local government's dispos-
al facility. Qualifying local governments
must first hold one or more public hearings
and find that other disposal facilities are
unavailable, inadequate, unreliable, or not
economically feasible to meet the current
-------
and anticipated needs of the locality; and
that the ordinance is necessary to ensure
the availability of adequate financing for
the construction, expansion or closing of
the locality's facilities. §15.1-29.01.
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants: Local governments may
receive quarterly grants to assist in the
collection, transportation, disposal and
management of solid waste. Grants may
also be obtained from the Solid Waste or
Recycling Revolving Fund to pay for solid
waste management or recycling facilities.
Solid Waste or Recycling Revolving Fund
is created from sums appropriated by.Gen-
eral Assembly and from receipts from
loans to local governments. §10.1-1413(a).
State Loans: Loans may be obtained from
the Solid Waste or Recycling Revolving
Fund to finance solid waste management or
recycling facilities. §62.1-241.6.
The Board will show a preference for
regional projects when awarding loans and
grants. §62.1-241.8.
Fees
If a county levies a consumer utility tax
and the ordinance provides that revenues
derived from the tax be used for solid
waste disposal, the county may charge a
town or its residents, and establishments an
amount not to exceed their pro rata cost,
based upon population for such solid waste
management. §10.1-1411.
Financial Assurance
No provisions.
Other Requirements
Legislation also requires:
Recycling by state agencies; §10.1-
1425.6.
Recycled material market development;
§10.1-1425.7.
Public education on recycling; § 10.1-
1422.
Public involvement in permitting pro-
cess for solid waste facility; §10.1-
1408.1(D).
Certification of waste facility operators
after January 1, 1993. §10.1-1408.2.
Legislation 'allows:
Local procurement preferences for
recycled material.
Legislation does not require:
Conflict resolution procedures;
Full ,cost accounting;
Universal collection.
-------
Unique Features
The governor may designate boundaries for
regional solid waste management areas.
Virginia's legislation is very general, pro-
viding the Board with the authority to take
necessary actions and issue necessary regu-
lations. Although the comprehensive solid
waste management legislation was passed
relatively early (1988), it avoided building
in problems or requirements that were
unworkable by delegating much of the
program development to the Board. The
legislation does, however, include very
specific and early recycling goals.
-------
-------
CONFERENCE OF SOUTHERN COUNTY ASSOCIATIONS
Regional Solid Waste/Environmental Network
Legislative Synopsis
West Virginia
Name and Date of Comprehensive Bill
and Amendments
Solid Waste Management Act 1983. 1988
(major rewriting of statute). Amended
1990, 1991. §20-5f-let seq.
Solid Waste Management Board Act. 1988.
Amended 1989. 1991. §16-26-1 et seq.
Responsible State Agency
Primary Agency
Division of Natural Resources: promul-
gates rules and regulations, issues per-
mits, coordinates litter control and
recycling efforts.
Solid Waste Management Board: devel-
ops state plan, designates solid waste
disposal sheds, may build and operate
solid waste disposal projects, may
make loans to governmental entities for
solid waste disposal projects
Secondary Agencies:
Department of Administration: develop
comprehensive procurement program
for recycled products. §20-11-7(b).
Governor's Office of Community and
Industrial Development: develop plan
by 1/15/92 on feasibility of certain
recycling industries (glass preparation,
de-inking and re-refine used motor oil).
§20-11-11.
Public Service Commission: issues
certificates of need for new and ex-
pandine facilities. §20-9-l2c(a)(l), 20-
9- 12d(a)(l), 20-9-12e(aKl?.
Waste Reduction/Recycling Goals
Waste reduction goal is to reduce disposal
of municipal solid waste by 20% of the per
capita solid waste disposed in 1991 by
1/1/94, 30% by 1/1/2000, and 50% by
1/1/20 ia §20- ll-
Planning Requirements
Solid Waste Management Board must
prepare state plan by 1/1/93 which will
include the county and regional plans. The
state plan must be updated every two
years. §16-26-6a.
Each county and regional solid waste au-
thority must develop a comprehensive litter
and solid waste control plan by 7/1/91.
§20-9-7. The plan must include a compre-
hensive recycling plan. §20-11-4. Each
county or regional solid waste authority
must also prepare a siting plan by 7/1/91.
§20-9- 12a.
-------
The State also imposes a solid waste as-
sessment fee of $1.00 per ton is levied on
disposal at any solid waste facility. §20-9-
L3(a). The proceeds of the fee shall be
placed in die "Solid Waste Planning Fund."
50% of the fund goes to the county and
regional solid waste authorities, and 50%
will go to the Solid Waste Management
Board to fund grants to county or regional
authorities and the Board's administrative
and technical costs. §20-9-13(h).
Solid waste supplemental assessment fee of
25 cents per ton levied on ail solid waste.
§20-ll-5b. This fee used to fund hazardous
waste emergency response fund. §20-1 l-5a.
A state recycling assessment fee of $2.00
per ton is imposed on solid waste as, well.
Funds generated will go in "Recycling
Assistance Fund." Division of Natural
Resources will allocate the funds such that
50% will go for grants to asses cities,
counties and "other interested parties" in
planning and implementing recycling pro-
grams, public education, and efforts to
develop recycling market 12.5% will be
used to fund full time conservation offi-
cers. 12.5% will be to governor's office of
community and industrial development to
help cities and counties construct wastewa-
ter treatment facilities. 12.5% will go to
the solid waste reclamation and environ-
mental response fund. 12.5% will go to
hazardous waste emergency response fund.
§20-ll-5a.
Financial Assurance
An operator of commercial solid waste
facility must furnish bond to assure perfor-
mance which conforms to statute and regu-
lations. §20-5F-5b. The bond may be in the
form of a "surety bonding, collateral bond-
ing, ... escrow account, letters of credit,
performance bonding fund participation..."
§2Q-5F-5b(c). This requirement applies to
private and public operators. See §20-5F-
2(f). The bond covers period up to 30
years after final closure of site.
Solid waste assessment fee imposed of
$4.00 per ton, with each facility deducting
amount that the public service commission
requires the facility set aside for closure
purposes. §20-5N-4. The remaining monies
are passed on to the state, which will remit
certain amount to the counties in which the
facility is located, with the rest going to
the closure cost assistance fund. §20-5N-
4(h).
Solid Waste Management Board may issue
solid waste closure revenue bonds and
notes to finance the closure of landfills.
§20-5N-4a.
Other Requirements
Legislation: Requires:
State agencies and schools must imple-
ment recycling program if no local plan
in place. §20-11-6.
State agencies must purchase recycled
products "to the maximum extent possi-
ble." §20-1 l-7(a).
Development of plan on feasibility of
recycling industries. §20-11-11.
Effort to attract industries that use
recyclable materials. §20-7-25(a)(9).
Development of public education pro-
grams on litter control and solid waste
disposal. §20-7-25, 20-7-27(b)(l).
-------
Public notice and involvement in siting
process. §20-5F-5c. 20-9- 12a, 20-9-
I2b(a).
Universal collection. §20-9-9.
Legislation Does Not Require:
Conflict resolution procedures.
Full cost accounting.
Operator certification.
Row control.
Unique Features
West Virginia is one of the few states to
take a "bottoms up" approach to construct-
ing a statewide solid waste management
plan. The West Virginia state plan in-
cludes the local solid waste management
plans.
The Public Service Commission's involve-
ment in the siting process of landfills may
be significant as it could represent a move
towards treating solid waste management
as a public utility.
The West Virginia legislation includes a
number of provisions diat put solid waste
issues to a vote of die public. A compre-
hensive recycling program may be estab-
lished in a county by public referendum.
§20-1 l-5(e). The siting of a Class A facili-
ty (handles 10-30 tons of solid waste per
month) is subject to vote in the county
where the facility is to be located if 15%
of the voters in the last governor's election
submit a petition. §20-9-12c(b). Upgrading
a facility or increasing the monthly tonnage
may also require a vote of the public. §20-
9-12d(b),20-9-l2e.
West Virginia's statutory scheme reveals a
strong concern about the problem of waste
imported from outside the wasteshed. Ex-
plicit legislative findings are made con-
cerning the costs of disposing of waste
generated outside die wasteshed. §20-5F-
5a(i). This waste is subject to an additional
fees. §20-5f-5a(a), 20-5F-12. The intent of
the legislature is to regulate and restrict
entities that dispose of wastes in West
Virginia that arc not accepted for disposal
in the place where the wastes were gener-
ated. §20-9-1. County or regional authority
may refuse to accept waste wjtiich origi-
nates outside the county or region. §20-9-
10. "To the extent permissible by law",
commercial waste facilities must first en-
sure that die local disposal needs are met
before accepting waste from outside die
local area. §20-5F-5(f).
State goal is 80$ of newsprint used by
newspapers published in die state contain
the "highest post-consumer recycled paper
content practicable" by 12/31/96. To that
effect, a recycled newsprint advisory com-
mittee is created within the Division of
Natural Resources. §20-11-10.
All commercial and public solid waste
facilities must provide one day per month
when person who is not in the business of
hauling waste and who is resident of wast-
eshed may dispose of up to one pick-up
load of residential solid waste free of all
charges. §20-5F-4b.
The Solid Waste Management Board shall
prepare report by 10/1/92 concerning feasi-
bility of implementing a mandatory fee for
collection and disposal of solid waste.
f
-------
Each municipality with population of at
least 10.000 people must establish a source
separation and curbside collection program
tor recyclables and must submit a plan
describing the implementation of this pro-
gram to the Solid Waste Management
Board. §20-11-5. Counties may establish a
comprehensive recycling program as well.
§20-ll-5(c).
Regionalization Provisions
Legislation recognizes that solid waste
disposal projects must be established on a
relatively large scale to be economically
feasible. §16-26-2. The state is divided into
solid waste disposal sheds which are geo-
graphical areas where the most economical
solid waste disposal projects can be estab-
lished. §16-26-8. In addition, any two or
more counties within the same solid waste
shed may establish a regional solid waste
authority. §20-9-4.
Flow Control Provisions
Waste produced outside the wasteshed is
subject to an added fee of $1.00 per ton
collected by the state. §20-5F-5a(a). Any
county with a Class A facility may impose
tee of up to $5.00 per ton of solid waste
from outside the wasteshed in which the
facility is located, and impose a fee of up
to $2.00 per ton for solid waste received
from within the wasteshed. §20-5F-12.
Financial Assistance to Local Govern-
ments
State Grants to Local Government: Solid
Waste Management Board may award
grants to persons and governmental agen-
cies for acquisition or construction of dis-
posal projects. §16-26-5.
State Loans to Local Governments: Solid
Waste Management Board may make loans
to persons and to governmental agencies
for acquisition or construction of disposal
projects. §16-26-5.
Fees
Solid Waste Disposal Board may charge
fees for use of any solid waste disposal
project owned in pan or whole be the
board. §16-26-16. County or regional au-
thority may charge fees for use of solid
waste facility or collection or transportation
provided by die authority. §20-9-12(14). A
county with a Class A faqility may impose
a fee on solid waste received at the facility
which is higher on waste from outside the
waste shed in which die facility is located.
§20-5F-12.
The State imposes a number of fees. A
solid waste assessment fee is imposed on
solidvwaste disposed of in any facility in
West" Virginia. Fee is: $1.25 per ton of
solid waste plus $1.00 per ton for waste
generated outside the solid waste disposal
shed in which the facility is located. §20-
5F-5a(a). This fee also applies to transfer
stations where waste is destined for out of
state. §20-5F-5a(d). The fee will fund the
"Solid Waste Reclamation and Environ-
mental Response Fund" (used for reclama-
tion, cleanup and remedial actions from
open dumps or solid waste not properly
disposed of), the "Solid Waste Enforce-
ment Fund" (used for administration, in-
spection, enforcement and permitting activ-
ities), and the "Solid Waste Management
Board Reserve Fund" (used to provide a
reserve fund for issuance and security of
solid waste disposal revenue bonds issued
by solid Waste Management Board). §20-
5F-5a(h).
-------
considering factors such as affordability,
impact on open dumping. §20-9-9(b)
------- |